Nationalism and Singapore

¶ … nationalism in Singapore. It is important for policy due to the fact that such a phenomenon can explode into a serious political situation that may well have international ramifications. Nationalism is the struggle of a local people to assert themselves, but this assertion almost always involves a physical conflict with aliens / foreigners (the enemy as they see them; immigrants as we know them). Aside from this conflict seeding dissension within a present-time peaceful and attractive county and, most likely, destructing this country, effects of this conflict can spill aboard causing other countries to step in to either aid or impede the conflict, and, in this manner, disseminate a war. Nationalism has, frequently, resulted in international war. On two occasions, it has consequented in a World War. For this reason, discussion of nationalism in Singapore is a significant topic.

My hypothesis is that Singapore is on the brink of nationalism. My alternate hypothesis is that Singapore will lack the courage to eventuate this nationalism. The following essay examines both theories and produces evidence for my conclusion which is that nationalism is an already existent-phenomenon.

The evidence for nationalism

Immigrants have flooded Singapore causing many local people to lose their job and aggravating an already troubled economic situation. Nationalism has, invariably, originated and flourished in economically challenging times, and this seems to be no less the situation in Singapore right now. Ripples are beginning to be felt, and once quiescent voices are gaining in strength and gaining adherents (see Seah Chiang Ne; Online)

As Abdul Malik comments: "The people of Singapore cannot remain blind to the fact that given the current rate of immigration of foreigners, they will eventually outnumber the population of True Born Singaporeans - the true sons of the land!"

Nationalists in Singapore -- and there is a core of them -- maintain that the land is small (only 642 square kilometers), and that much of this land is already taken up with industry and military products, for instance, leaving little to house a meager population. It is insufferable, therefore, that this precious land should be squandered on nearly a million foreigners who have come to rob Singaporeans of their business. Furthermore, it is part of the social contract that the government protects its citizens first. These are the reasons that the Singaporean nationalist gives for promoting nationalism. (Malik, online).

Finally, were one to argue that Singapore benefits from the immigrant's wealth and is a prosperous nation, Alvin Toffler's observation on resurgence of nation-state in the 21st century asserts that it is precisely these sort of states that rebel. In the past it was poverty that drove people to demand rights, but now it will be the wealthy regions who will refuse to pay taxes for money that will go to foreigners. The government, also, is compelled to relinquish some of its power to, oftentimes, the more powerful corporate organizations that are owned by foreigners. These, and a combination of other issues, will cause Singaporeans to become more nationalistic and to revolt against a foreign presence. Toffler has been correct with past predictions; indications indicate that he may well be correct with this one too.

Evidence against

Singapore is already a diverse nation. Unlike Germany whose citizens saw themselves as German, Singapore's citizens see themselves in terms of their background races even if these background races have been in Singapore for already several generations. The four races have their own color, language, creed, and religion and have been long content to remain as this. Nationalism, therefore, seems unlikely to occur in a country that is so diversified -- and content with this diversity - as it already is. Moreover, Singapore is a main island that is surrounded by 60 islets. Nationalism has historically originated in countries that were geographically one solid bloc of land and the threat of one or more foreign nations sharing that same one land caused nationalism to take root. We see that with Italy under Bismark, and we see that today with Israel (a tiny land that is split between two people). This is the pattern of nationalism where lack of geographical boundaries cause the threatening presence of the 'foreigner' to be felt all the more. Singapore's breadth and space as well as its many dividing rivulets of water should serve as distracting influence. More so, Singapore owes its affluence and prosperity to its influx of immigrants. And finally, Singapore has never evidenced any violent upsurge of historic nationalism. For it to do so now seems to be out of sync with its character (Singapore History. online).