The audience at my political talks, no matter what controversial issues I raise, are usually very restrained, polite and even encouraging. But one of these days, when I talk about a particularly sensitive topic—is our society still ruled by fear?—someone may be provoked to ask directly what the PAP leaders have only so far said obliquely: ‘If there is fear, how can you be talking so freely? You are your own contradiction of your favourite theory!’

This argument is sometimes seen as the ultimate, knock-down, drag-out, once-and-for-all silencing of the critic in Singapore.

Indeed, despite the obvious Government displeasure shown over my political commentaries more than 15 years ago, I have been speaking my mind freely at public conferences, college and university seminars, TV panel discussions and interviews. I have never been ‘called up’ to answer any government queries, never been warned, rebuked, told to refrain from giving interviews to foreign journalists, etc. So what’s all the fuss about there being no freedom of expression in Singapore?

At the risk of sounding unappreciative of the wide berth I’m obviously being allowed, I would like to make one point, and it is this:

There is still a climate of fear in Singapore, and somebody needs to point that out. For fear, no matter what form it takes, always means that, in one way or another, freedom is being curbed .

The fear in Singapore is a special, almost unique kind, for it is self-imposed. Its most obvious form is self-censorship. Hence it may be described as something willed by the people themselves, rather than coming from some outside authority. It is precisely the kind of fear that any government with an authoritarian disposition, would welcome, as making its job that much easier.

Why is there this fear, since the PAP government never tells Singaporeans what they are allowed to say or not to say (beyond general pronouncements about ‘out-of-bounds markers’ in the period following my controversial commentaries)? Why do Singaporeans so assiduously avoid any criticism of the government, indeed avoid saying anything that may be construed as anti-PAP? Why do those in positions of authority in the academic institutions and the media hesitate to allow publication of research studies, articles or reports that criticize Government policy?

At the level of the ordinary Singaporean going about his or her day-to-day activities, this self—imposed fear can take on very exaggerated forms. In the last General Election, a friend confided that she would have liked to vote for the Opposition, except that she had no choice but to vote for the PAP instead. ‘Why?’ I asked. ‘Because,’ she whispered, looking around furtively to make sure nobody was listening, ‘my son-in-law is due for a promotion and I don’t want to jeopardize his chances!’

The fear in our society is far from the kind seen in a police state, where the dissident is interrogated, thrown into jail, tortured, etc, exactly the kind that the PAP leaders proudly dissociate themselves from, when they say, ‘See, you’ve been freely criticizing the government and nothing has happened to you. You’re still very much around!’ (Surely they cannot benchmark Singapore society at this stage of its development as a member of the free world against brutal rogue states?)

Here the fear is far more subtle, far less palpable and noticeable, but no less effective . It is the fear of losing the good life, the material prosperity that the PAP leadership has made possible. It is, most of all, the fear of being sued by the Government and being reduced to bankruptcy.

So what’s wrong with this kind of fear? Surely, it makes no difference at all to the good life that is being enjoyed and envied by others in the world, who would, quite happily, give up their so-called liberties for it.

Call me a pessimist but I can’t help thinking that it is precisely this climate of fear, which is the more insidious for not being obvious, that will eventually turn Singaporeans into an unquestioning, compliant society (if it hasn’t already done so). When the power of the ruling party on the one hand, and the compliance of the people, on the other, continually feed each other into a state of complete complacence, that surely cannot be good for the society in the long term.

---

About Vignettes...

A continuing flow of little, readable pieces that will constitute what I feel is an important 'legacy of values' to leave behind. Read more about Vignettes...