Self-Censorship: Singapore's Shame
By James Gomez, Think Centre Singapore, 1999, 90 pages S$18.90.
SINGAPORE (JP): What does it take to speak one's mind in Singapore, especially on topics deemed "sensitive"? A thick skin helps. That, and a freedom from fear. Evidently, James Gomez possesses both attributes. A police investigation into his activities -- mainly for organizing public talks -- has not daunted him. In late January, police informed Gomez and three of his friends that they would not be prosecuted for holding a public forum last October without official permission. The session was titled Youth and Politics in Singapore. Instead, they were let off with a "verbal warning".
Since then, Gomez and associates have held at least two other public forums under the Politics 21 series -- "Every Singaporean matters". The most recent forum, held in early March, was on the subject of human rights. Normally it is a topic that would turn off most Singaporeans, nevertheless, the forum drew about 150 people. Among the speakers that evening was Chee Soon Juan, the secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party, who, after losing his job at the university, has been reduced to selling his books on the streets these days.
At the human rights forum, there was a general consensus that Singaporeans seem to be afraid to speak out. This conclusion, in fact, forms the basis for Gomez's book, Self Censorship: Singapore's Shame, which he published himself last year, since, according to him, no publisher in Singapore dared to undertake the project. Gomez says he spent S$10,000 of his own money to publish and promote the 90-page book.
Gomez's willingness to literally put his money where his mouth is makes him stand out in Singapore society, which finds comfort in conformity. That Gomez isn't associated with any political party actually helps his cause. He would like more Singaporeans to speak their minds openly, without fear, and he is sending out this message with no obvious political agenda.
A former student activist who majored in political science at the National University of Singapore, Gomez went on to get a masters degree in politics from the University of Essex in the U.K. Currently, he holds the position of a researcher at a German foundation. He is also a member of the Roundtable, a Singaporean policy discussion group.
Gomez might have inherited some of his public speaking flair from his father, Thomas Vincent Gomez, who was a founder of the once powerful Singapore Mercantile Workers' Union during the post-colonial period when unions were hotbeds for activism. James was the youngest of 11 children, but the only one with an interest in politics. The author dedicated his book to the memory of his father, who died last year.
A month after he came under police investigation for organizing the October forum, he applied for a public entertainment license to launch his book, but the police turned down the application. They said a book launch per se did not require a license -- but public talks did. Mindful of watchful eyes, Gomez refrained from giving a speech during the launch, but fielded questions.
After the book was launched, however, he found out that not every major bookstore would carry the title. He threatened to picket one of them by carrying a placard saying "Shame!" The threat appeared to work, as the shop eventually made a few copies available for sale. However, at least one bookstore abruptly returned unsold copies of the book, proving Gomez correct in his book title.
Explaining his title, Gomez says: "Singaporeans are very face-conscious, so shaming them is an effective tool." He states in the preface: "The strength of the censorial sentiment that operates within the Republic is so pervasive that it is crippling. It prevents citizens and residents from raising questions, voicing opinions and acting on matters that affect their polity. On the surface, when it comes to regular matters, everything seems normal in Singapore; however, when it comes to alternative political expression, it is very different. There is a climate of fear."
He writes: "This book sets out to demarcate, describe and evaluate the built-in political self-checking system that helps the ruling party less visibly maintain its power." He argues that the phenomenon of self-censorship is one of the tools the People's Action Party indirectly uses to maintain its hold over the Republic and its people. Political participation in Singapore has been regarded as being "the exclusive domain of the PAP".
In Gomez's view, the individual who has different opinions from mainstream political thought would feel subjected to informal pressures not to express himself, yielding to one of three types of censorship: censorship by the state; private self-censorship; or censorship of others by the people.
Gomez's book does not add anything new to the issue of expressing political dissent in Singapore. It does not offer any profound suggestions on overcoming the innate Singaporean inclination for self-censorship. (Although the author does include a section titled "Agenda for Action: What Can We Do?")
But the fact that one week after its launch, it became the best selling nonfiction book at MPH bookstore indicates that Gomez has struck a chord with some readers.
Encouragingly, the government has signaled that it wants a lively discussion and debate about the "Singapore 21 vision". (The Singapore 21 process was initiated by the government in response to sociodemographic changes such as an aging population and an increasing social divide. The government consulted over 6,000 people for opinions on how to strengthen community bonds so people would remain committed to Singapore and to keep the country "relevant" in the 21st century.) The PAP's current moves to welcome broader public discussion and participation come after many years of indoctrinating into most citizens' minds that it is better to stay "meek and mild," after leading opposition political figures have been slapped with legal action.
To promote freer discussion, one can only hope that bureaucrats and civil servants, and indeed, the entire population, will pay heed to the recent remarks made by Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who said: "We hold nothing against anyone for simply holding a different opinion from the government". For more credibility, he should have added: "Nor for expressing it."
If the government truly wants progress in achieving the Singapore 21 vision, it has to ensure that the message permeates through its ranks. And the day when books like Gomez's raise yawns rather than eyebrows will be the day Singapore takes a big step forward in that direction.
