Is Racial Harmony Day still relevant?
(Commentary/Opinion Piece by Editor)
Post originally published on 21 July 2020 in Facebook and Instagram.
So here it goes — today is Racial Harmony Day. Do we still need to talk about the ‘racial’ riots that took place in 1964? Historian Thum Ping Tjin, or affectionately known as PJ Thum, called out the PAP government’s true intent in introducing Racial Harmony Day in 1997, which is a whopping 33 years after the riots we were supposed to be ‘commemorating’. PJ Thum argues that it was part of the efforts by the PAP in the 1990’s to take charge of Singapore’s narrative by framing history through their perspective as our benevolent rulers and successors to our glorious colonial past (i.e. National Education, The Singapore Story, Social Studies.) And so from the very onset, we see that Racial Harmony Day is not really about racial harmony after all. But surely one can’t deny the importance of having racial harmony?
There are too many examples in recent years (and even this very year itself) where we see Race and Religion taking centre stage in our public discourse in Singapore. They can broadly be categorised into (1) Societal Controversies and (2) Racialised Politics/Policies. Societal Controversies would usually include situations on the ground like our local media’s incessant love of brownface and the many reactions to it (e.g. Preetipls). Things like the “Is it because I’m Chinese” ‘kidnapping’ case can also be categorised here. Racialised Politics/Policies, on the other hand, of course can only come from the government and how they continually introduce policies that enshrines racialism in our society, i.e. CMIO, GRC system, and yes the unpopular Reserved Presidential Elections. During this GE2020, somehow, we managed to witness how Societal Controversy and Racialised Politics/Policies come together in none other than the Raeesah Khan incident.
The first problem with Racial Harmony Day, as mentioned, is its connection to the 1964 riots. Yes we should not downplay the riots, but to use it as precautionary tale on the fragility of our social cohesiveness? For many years we chose to avoid talking about race altogether. Because later got riot, how? So do we really need a reminder from riots that took place more than half a century ago, from an event of which few of us truly understand and accounts of it still differ today depending on who you ask. But of course Racial Harmony Day celebrations in school nowadays are less about riots fearmongering and more about fun-loving isn’t it, with kids wearing costumes of other ethnic cultures and all that. Cultural appreciation, if you will. Appreciate all we want, but we need to keep the conversation going if we want to truly embrace an inclusive society.
And in light of the recent GE2020, there’s been some acknowledgement that Singapore as a society should mature into one that is capable of discussing and have conversations about Race without having someone go “Harlow Polis”. The reaction to the police reports against now MP-elect Raeesah Khan during campaigning period was so immense that it prompted the Elections Department to disallow making police reports against Candidates during Cooling Off Day. So are we as a society so stunted in our growth that we need to be told not to misuse our enforcement tools and our laws concerning Race and Religion? Surely the government need not only rethink “Racial Harmony”, but the dangers of not encouraging a genuine open conversation about Race and Religion beyond the spectre of PAP-UMNO political clash and rivalry in the 1960’s for crying out loud.
There were many stances regarding the Raeesah Khan incident. Whether it was right or wrong of her to express those thoughts about Race in the first place, whether an apology was warranted or not, etc. But calling on the cops for posts written 2 years ago during election campaigning? That doesn’t sit well with most. So it’s not really about Race that people object to, then? Just gutter politics. But take a quick look at the The Straits Times Facebook comments on the post regarding NLB removal of the Chinese-language children’s book “Who Wins?”. The removal is due to the complaint on its clearly racist portrayal of a dark-skinned bully character Mao Mao (Chinese for hairy). It’s an open and shut case. A racist children book must be called out for what it is. But for every one person who defends the book in the comments, that’s just one more reason pointing at the sheer failure of Racial Harmony Day. Or to echo Preetipls in her latest video today: Check Your Privilege Day.
Perhaps this is why there are calls to rename Racial Harmony Day or even those in favour of abolishing it altogether. Because clearly if some segments of the society cannot even tell what is racist and what is not, then we cannot even begin to discuss majority privilege or the marginalisation of minorities in Singapore. If calling out racism is seen as being “overly sensitive”, then where’s the line to be drawn on what is acceptable in the public discourse about Race? It is reprehensible that a children’s book can be used to perpetuate racist overtones and stereotypes, yet there are those who still defend it. Then who are we to blame when our children grow up no better than us? They are even far cut off from the memory of the riots, yet nowhere near racially harmonious as they ought to be.
