Sometimes, protest is the only way

The following was sent to Today Voices. This is really just me offering another perspective to what I feel is a biased topic, given our government's relentless pursuit for peace and order. Just another two cents...

Incidentally, this is also my first post with an image in it! Yes yes, big fat hairy deal, but tech is not really one of my fortes, so pride comes naturally with such an accomplishment... :)

* * * * *

I read with some disappointment Ho Kong Loon’s article, “When actions speak louder than words” (Sep 19).

Unfortunately, I believe that Ho’s take on civil society organisations (CSOs) reflect a common sentiment in Singapore society. Since the 1960s, the lack of any large scale civil unrest in Singapore has led to an acceptance – nay, an embracement – that quiet, civilised streets are the most desirable thing for our nation. This mentality, I propose, has been ingrained into our national psyche, such that we believe it to be the best for the world, too.

Of course, there is good reason for us to believe so. We live in our micro world of abundance, and are witnesses to the shrinking proportion of our low-income families. Education has provided almost equal opportunities for everyone. To add, we are a society born of trade and no natural resources. Should our government decide to open our doors to, say, another apple exporter, we are only gleeful that it might cost a few cents less, not worry about whether we can sell the rotting stocks on our farms at the wholesalers.

Seasoned with our acclaimed good governance rhetoric, and we begin to believe that everything can be solved from the comfortable seat at a negotiation table. Indeed, I believe Ho would have produced many sensible, reasonable and diplomatic students in his time as an educator, who would have done us proud as Singapore’s voice of reason in the world.

But in reality, the rest of the world does not work this way. Not every country can claim that an excess of 90% of its population have completed 10 years of basic schooling. We must realise that not everyone has the benefit of a good education to let them articulate their woes before an international body. Even writing a petition and getting 100 signatures might be difficult for some. Add to that the fact that petitions would take some time to reach the powers that be, probably way after the decision that would critically impair their livelihood has been made, and the prospect of an instant mass demonstration looks really appealing.

Imagine this situation: A little village boy sits outside a jewelry shop for tourists, somewhere in central Turkey, selling dried fruits, nuts and head scarves for one lira a pack. The only life he knows is that an occasional tourist, happy from the 1000 lira bargain he has made at the shop, might have some pity on him and spare some change. His younger brother takes over soon and he rushes home to help his mother carry a handmade carpet, painstaking weaved in 3 months, to another tourist shop, where she sells it for 300 lira. The shop owner pays her, fingering the fine workmanship and valuing it at 1500 lira on the open market.

Unjust? Never mind, perhaps someday, the young boy would be able to stand in front of the World Bank president and tell him to bring justice to their lives. Perhaps. Or it might just make more sense for him to gather a few more families and break down the doors of tourist shops.

For this reason, the existence, actions and motivations of CSOs are more important than the perceived unrest they cause. They might not even constitute those at the direct mercy of big profiteering corporations or corrupt governments, but their passion and their cause is blatantly focused – to represent and help those who will be disadvantaged by the decisions of those they perceive to be greedy or ignorant, with whom negotiation would likely be futile. Public protests serve as loudhailers for those who cannot articulate their grievances, whatever the reason. CSOs wish to be heard out loud, precisely because there are people who are unaware of or chose to ignore the unfairness going on in our world.

But what is the effectiveness of public protests, if Ho’s description of the “theatrics” suggests little more than a “carnival atmosphere”? Here’s the news flash: Opinion leaders and key policy makers, those whose very decisions would affect billions, cannot choose to ignore, or be seen to ignore, a public demonstration that happens just as they are walking to their meeting venue.

Public protests are about bringing critical mass to the human rights of every individual drowned in the tidal wave of progress. CSOs understand that. They probably also understand that, even if they could secure a place at the negotiating table, as Ho professes, the weight of their votes would be puny. But rousing public sentiment to their cause would force governments and corporations to take heed as their voters and customers begin to question their decisions and take sides. The further their voices reach, the greater their support; hence, putting them in a little room to protest is a laughable concept. Public protests are a calculated political move by CSOs fully aware of what their actions can lead to. They should not be mistaken as unruly groups of “manipulators, instigators, the intoxicated, the uninhibited, the over-enthusiastic or the lunatic fringe”.

Ho’s letter might also have given, I believe, the wrong impression that when CSOs protest, their aim is to create a racket of unnecessary showmanship, orchestrated only for the benefit of the public eye and foreign journalists. But no rational human being would leave his job and family to take a chance at a protest, unless they are convinced that it is the last resort. There was a time when I witnessed dockworkers in Australia storming picket lines to demand for better work benefits. There was no bloodshed, but I believe that negotiation would have failed them many times before they resorted to such actions, for staying off work for them meant taking a risk with their paychecks.

We might also argue, as Ho has, that having to clean up the mess from public demonstrations is a burden that the host has to bear. Again, this is not the prevalent characteristic of public demonstrations. I believe that this perception is born of the media’s tendency to focus on events that have turned ugly. Most public protests could have been quiet affairs that exert their own local influence without coming to the attention of the media. I remember the lecturers of my university protesting for better pay, but their dedication and professionalism has kept our classes going as scheduled – the protests were done in their free time and, most poignantly, during our graduation ceremony. It was their fight, but they recognised that the final beneficiaries are still their students.

Of course, we need not offer apologies for clamping down on CSOs – this is our land, so play by our rules. But as a member of the global community, it would only do Singapore good to think out of the confines of our dignified and orderly society, and start to understand the difficulties that our fellow global citizens face. When we begin to see that a public protest could be their most logical recourse for justice, not just a mere voicing of their grouses, we might also begin to empathise with the causes of CSOs. For sure, if they succeed, they might create a dent in our global economy. But if it means that some Turkish village boy can have a better shot at life, I’ll take my chances. N