Limpeh's reaction to the Hong Lim Park protest over the government's population white paper

I am reading about the protest in Hong Lim Park today against the government's plans for a population target of 6.9 million in their white paper and I have mixed feelings. On one hand, sure I feel encouraged by the fact that some Singaporeans do have the balls to speak up and protest - at least a few thousand Singaporeans have the brains to direct their anger directly at the culprits of this ridiculous mess: the PAP, rather than give in to racist xenophobia. On the other hand, I do wonder what difference this would make: is it a case of way too little too late?

What I found particularly distasteful was the way the state-controlled local media played down the figures:
Citizens: 7000+ people attended.
Wanbao: More than 3,000 people attended
CNA: More than 2,000 people attended
Straits Times: More than 1,000 people attended
News938: Hundreds of people attended

From what I gathered from people who were there helping the organizers, the true figures were probably around the 3000 mark. We could split hairs of course, about whether you want to include people who were just there to watch the event as opposed to people who were there and actively protested; or whether you include people who were there for the whole event or those who attended say for 45 minutes or an hour. But 3000 seems like a reasonable number - clearly, the sate media is blatantly lying when they try to quote figures like 1000 or "hundreds". If you were to compare this to protests in other countries, it's actually a fairly small number. Similar anti-government protests in nearby Kuala Lumpur (the Bersih rallies) attracted 250,000 protesters and in London, over 500,000 protesters took part in a march against British involvement in the war in Iraq in 2003. Heck, when the Pope visited London in 2010, I took part in a protest with 10,000 people who were didn't want the Pope (he is such a nasty, hateful, vile bigot - don't get me started on him) to be welcomed in this country. 

So sadly, even at 3000 - that's a pretty small figure as far as protests go. It's a baby step in terms of Singaporeans finding their voices - but I am left disappointed in wondering if one has the luxury of taking such small, tentative, baby steps in a race to solve the problem of the population time bomb. Wake up Singapore, you don't have the luxury of time to take such little baby steps - you need to act fast and you need to act now. Don't expect this government to 'wake up' - you have to wake the people around you up and start engaging with them: I'm talking about the 60.14% who voted for the PAP. You need to engage them, talk to them and convince them that they have made a terrible error of judgement. What I find truly laughable are the stupid Singaporeans who think that the PAP will notice this small protest then change their minds on the issue of 6.9 million - oh for crying out aloud, who the hell are you trying to kid? IMHO, any solution will have to involve kicking out the PAP for good. 

Do you really think the PAP is going to listen to you?

The PAP are probably laughing at how small and low-key the event was compared to the Bersih protests in Kuala Lumpur, it was barely a ripple in the ocean that would barely be noticed. They are going to say, "even if 3000 people have a problem with our white paper on population, that's 3000 people out of millions of Singaporeans. They're in the minority and we're not going to roll over and change our minds on the issue just because 3000 people protested about it." Once again, the Malaysians have put Singaporeans to shame again. 

Sadly, that is the pathetic nature of Singaporeans. This is what I witnessed today on Facebook - one of my dear friends in Singapore posted a link to a serious article about the Hong Lim Park protests and it attracted many flippant, snide remarks by his Singaporean friends. I couldn't resist responding to one of the snide remarks made (my bad, I should never engage with such fucking retards) and the idiot replied, "I am just being sarcastic, learn it, it's called sarcasm." Oh for crying out aloud - that's what most Singaporeans will do, they will go as far as to write stupid shit on Facebook but they don't seem to want to do anything about trying to be a part of the solution to try to resolve population problem. What a bunch of stupid, useless fuckers these people are - all talk, no action, no balls. I was so tempted to reply, "Well I have a British passport and own two properties in London - please enjoy Chinapore with 6.9 million people, I hope you like living with PRCs and I hope your Mandarin is good.". But no, I didn't wanna get dragged into that kind of exchange. 

Perhaps the problem isn't so much the PAP's misguided policies on population growth - rather, it is the silent majority of seemingly well educated Singaporeans who are unable and/or unwilling to engage the issue in a constructive manner. It's like they're watching a car crash in slow motion, yet their feeble response beggars belief. People are usually quite quick to react when it is a crisis which takes them by surprise, such as when the meteor hit Chelyabinsk city in Russia, shattering windows with a sonic boom and injuring nearly a thousand people. Immediately, there were injured people to help, damaged buildings to repair and people were quick to react. However, when the figure of 6.9 million is something that will only eventually be reached in around 2030 (in 17 years), Singaporeans don't feel a sense of urgency in terms of trying to prevent that from happening. Either that, or they think that they have more time to react so they don't need to do anything now... or they are hoping for someone else to react on their behalf, to find an alternative solution to the proposed 6.9 million plan, so they don't need to do anything. 

What is at the root of the problem is this Singaporean attitude of expecting someone else to solve your problems - here's a true story that my friend Amy who is a primary school teacher in Singapore told me recently.

"One Monday morning, Amy had a rude shock when she turned up at school - there was some pretty vulgar graffiti on the wall by the school gates. Some parents were shocked, some students were laughing at it and it wasn't long before the school principal was told about it and ordered the school cleaner to clean it up. When the cleaner went to see the graffiti, he said it wasn't on school property. They went to take a closer look with the cleaner - he was right. There was a wall that looked like an extension of the school's wall, but it continues into the field next to the school and ended a few metres away by a storm drain. It clearly wasn't on school property. So who was responsible for that wall?

The school clerk made a few inquiries and her hunch was that as the wall was near the road, it would be Singapore Land Transport Authority. She got hold of someone at the LTA who asked her to send a photograph of the wall (graffiti and all) to them, which she did promptly. Within a few hours, the reply came from the LTA that the wall did not fall under their jurisdiction and they were not sure who was responsible, but it wasn't them.

She then thought, okay, the wall ended by the big drain and there were two trees near the wall in that field, perhaps it was something to do with the National Parks Board - again, same drill. She emailed them a photo and they came back to her a few hours later, nope, that wall has nothing to do with us, we manage the parkland in the photo but not that wall, that's not our job. If it is a problem with the trees or plants there we can respond, but perhaps you could try CPG Corporation (formerly known as Public Works Department) for that wall.

So she got in touch with CPG and emailed them a photo - again, same reply, we're not responsible for that wall in the picture but as it is next to a big storm drain, you may want to try the PUB (Public Utilities Board). Once again, she tried the PUB - quelle surprise, they were not responsible for that wall. They suggested she tried the Building and Construction Authority, who in turn told her, no we're not responsible for that wall, have you tried the National Environmental Agency? She then got in touch with the NEA who informed her that whilst they may be responsible for street cleaning, as that wall lay in parkland near a drain, it would really be PUB or NParks responsible for that wall as PUB and NParks were responsible for the cleaning of their assets like drains and park areas. The school clerk said in exasperation, "But I have already talked to them already!" Long pause. The person at the NEA then suggested, "In that case, have you spoken to the LTA about it?"

Nobody wanted to take responsibility for that wall. 

She was back where she started so she went to the principal and said, "look I'm sorry I really tried, can we just clean up that graffiti ourselves?" Instead of thanking her for her efforts, the principal berated her for not trying hard enough to find the correct people responsible for that wall. This was then the principal called upon my friend Amy to help out the school clerk - Amy was a bright graduate from NUS and the principal assumed that Amy would be more resourceful than the school clerk who was in her 50s.

Amy was sent around in circles as well and most people she spoke to were very sympathetic when they saw the photo she emailed them, but the reply was always the same, "it's not us who are responsible for that wall I'm afraid, perhaps it would be easiest if you simply cleaned it up yourself if you want to resolve the situation as soon as possible." Amy checked the time - the school day would be over soon and the students would have to leave the school and see that graffiti. In desperation, she pleaded with the principal, "look I'll do it myself, give me $20. I'll run to the hardware shop, get some paint and paint over that graffiti - it'll take me 30 minutes or less."

Amy wanted to take matters into her own hands.

Did the principal appreciate her gesture? No, he didn't. He was too Singaporean to have the common sense to accept Amy's kind gesture. "Please lah, if the wall is not on school property, then we cannot any how go and meddle with it, even if that graffiti is an eyesore. I tell you, my neighbour has these ghastly purple curtains that are so ugly, but it is on her property, I cannot just go into her house and take down those ugly curtains just because I think they're an eyesore. How can like that one, right? This is Singapore lah. We have to follow the rules and do things properly!"

The principal was so disappointed in Amy's attempt to take matters into her own hands he declared, "Amy, thank you for your help but I think it's best if I handled this myself. You clearly don't understand how things work here." Over the next two days, Amy cringed as she walked past the school gates as kids giggled and laughed at the graffiti - a student even asked her in class, "Why is that word so naughty? Why can't I say that word? Why do people want to write the word 'FUCK' on the wall?" Oh, and the parents complained, "Do something about it! We can't have our children looking at that wall on the way to and from school every day! How can you put up with that in front of the school?" 

"Mummy, I saw this word on the wall by the school gates..."

The principal was trying very hard, spending ages on the phone, shouting at various statutory boards demanding that someone came and did something about that graffiti. Finally, at the end of the second day, a parent took matters into his own hands and painted that wall over - the principal couldn't stop the angry parent and it was over and done within a matter of minutes. The parent simply drove up to the wall with a tin of paint, took out a brush and got down to work. Before the principal could get down there and stop him, the job was finished and the parent was packing up."

The moral of the story? If you want something done, do it yourself, don't wait for someone else to do it for you. I'm afraid too many Singaporeans expect others to do the job for them rather than get their own hands dirty. It is this attitude that presents the problem with the reaction against the 6.9 million proposal - I spoke to my mother today and she is a pro-PAP supporter who has always voted PAP all her life. Without mentioning the word 'PAP', I asked her what she felt about the possibility of the population of Singapore hitting 6.9 million. She gave me a long rant about how overcrowded the country already is, public transport will not be able to cope, there won't be enough places in the schools, everything will become more expensive as resources are already so scarce and the next generation will struggle to get on the property ladder. Okay, so she is aware of the problem - but will she do anything about the situation? No, she won't - she'll rather sit back and wait for someone else to try to deal with the situation no matter how unhappy she is. Why? The answer may lie in the following story which I first saw years ago but the message is timeless.

This is a story about four people: Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody. There was a very important job to be done and Everybody was asked to do it. Everybody was sure Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got very angry about that because it was really Everybody's job. Everybody thought Anybody could have easily done it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when really, actually Nobody asked Anybody.

I congratulate everyone who braved the weather to turn up at Hong Lim Park for this historic event. As always, feel free to leave a comment and let me know your thoughts on the issue, thanks for reading!