Bastions of Social Demise: Culture & Religion

Though much has been said of the achievements of Singapore as a first world economy, the social malaise facing the city-state is a major concern for many. Divorces, youth delinquency, frauds, social bickering, mismanagement and financial inadequaciea have tainted the beauty of a national building project that is set to take shape in years to come. With the population engulfed in consumerist behaviour, the project of making Singapore a keen tourist destination adds on to the vibrant economic setting which Singaporeans do not want to miss. Live life to the fullest, live to the moment, live for today, tomorrow shall be better seems to be the believe that many Singaporeans hold in order to offset the disappointment of class permanency and problems that beset them as part of life tribulations.

Indeed such personal slogans may give a positive outlook to life, yet one questions why such slogans are the mantra of modern people when modernity by its own premise promises happiness through the mechanics of materialism. And why do we need slogans if modernity has prepared for us through its modes of production the beauty of life? Structurally we are better off than our predecessors were. Shouldn't we be better spiritually too? Herein lies the contradiction. As Singaporeans hold on those slogan mantras, it is done not with any other intention but to ease the thought of what they seem to be owning requires rigorous effort to maintain it, not knowing whether they will live to an old age to enjoy the fruits of their labour. The temporal sense of ownership ranging from goods to relationships in a modern city-state make us realise that a first economy may not afterall bring about first world attitude and belief. People becomes more individualistic and self-centred. Shared values as part of curriculum in schools and national vision have not been able to abate the growing trends of self-preservation, at times at the expense of others.

All is not lost. If we look back into history and ponder on the how our forefathers have been able to maintain social solidarity, community sanity and personal dreams, we can point to the strength that culture and religion have provided for the people then. Institutions, codes, morality and personalities in culture and religion helped in butressing the individual and community from an endemic demise yet admittedly knowing that one or two among the social groups may fall into error. This is indeed much better that the situation know where out of ten people, five to six of them are committed to social ills. This return to the authentic source of culture and religion must be done in full sincerity, disregarding political concerns that the government of the day may have. For if one were to point to the riots of 1964 and 1969, and the Nadra Tragedy as bigotries of ethnic and religious solidarity, one could also put a high share of responsibility on governance that emphasise of skewed ideology of pragmatism rather than on truth and justice. The common denominators for social peace is to accept each one of us in their own way yet finding common spaces to work together. This is different from creating a new space and force these cultural and religious societies to fit into a mould that is alien to them. As a result, we see today many Singaporeans have lost their sense of identity, not knowing whether they are East or West, secular or cultural-religious. In the deliberation of politics, this dilemma is cause by the advent of nation-states which provide social instability and removes authorities that provide social harmony at large. Society is deconstructed to the detrimental of the society itself.

Culture and religion are bastions of social demise. Culture which is rooted in tradition and religion provides the ingredients of values, morality and institutions that will help communities overcome the challenge of social ills that will burden Singapore in the future. And this has to be done with great commitment, sincerity and trust, rather than a policy initiative that is structural and politically monitored. That can only be done if we want to see the country move ahead as a first world both in terms of economy and social cohesion.