SPEECH BY BG LEE HSIEN LOONG, MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY AND SECOND MINISTER FOR DEFENCE (SERVICES) AT THIRD ALUMNI

INTERNATIONAL SINGAPORE ON ‘THE NATIONAL IDEOLOGY - A DIRECTION AND IDENTITY FOR SINGAPORE' AT MARGAUX BALLROOM,

MERIDIEN HOTEL ON WEDNESDAY, 11 JANUARY 1989 AT 8.00 PM

In October last year, the First Deputy Prime Mr Goh Chok Tong, suggested that Singaporeans

should have a National Ideology, a set of guiding principles to live by, similar to the Pancasila in Indonesia, or the Rukunegara in Malaysia.

Mr Goh's speech touched off a lively discussion as to what the problem was, whether such a National Ideology was necessary, and if so what it should include. The debate generated much heat and some light.

Tonight I intend to present my personal view of the which raises many issues:

What is the problem?

How will a National Ideology help us to build a Singaporean identity?

which core values should we emphasise? they universal, Oriental, or unique?

How do we reconcile common core values with our diversity of cultural heritages, including Confucianism among the Chinese, and Islam among the

2

What specifically do we need to do?

I will not be able to answer all these questions definitively tonight, but I hope my talk will provide a framework to carry the discussion another step forward.

The problem is Westernisation

First, what is the problem we are trying to solve? In one word, Westernisation. Singaporeans are rapidly becoming Westernised, although not all at the same rate.

l It is happening to the Chinese more than to the Indians, and to the Indians more than to the Malays.

One indicator of this is loss of faith in traditional religions. Many Chinese have given up Taoism, Buddhism or ancestor worship. However, most Indians continue to practise Hinduism or the Sikh religion. And among the Malays, Islam is a strong, revivalist force. no Malays have been converted out of Islam into any other religions.

Because of this Westernisation, Singapore society has become different from other East Asian countries, like Taiwan or Hong Kong. As a people, we have also changed, in outlook and attitudes, from what we were 10 or 20 years ago. This is an objective fact, and not just nostalgia for a vanished past.

Even today, the process is not complete. Our people's values are still changing rapidly. With universal English education. we have become a totally open society. The next generation is not growing up with the same values and outlook as their parents. Nor is it acquiring updated values which their parents' generation have carefully thought out and imbued in them. As a society, we are absorbing ideas from outside faster than we can digest them, and in danger of losing our sense of direction.

3

In the short term, Westernisation has helped

What the end result of this transformation will be no one can yet tell. In the short term, Westernisation has helped our economic growth. It has made us more cosmopolitan, less inscrutable. It has helped us to run a more rationalistic government, and build a more efficient economy. As one American chief executive of a multi- national corporation told me: of all the East Asian countries, US firms find it easiest of all to operate in Singapore - because Singaporeans are most similar to the Americans.

But in the long term, many dangers

But in the long term, further Westernisation holds many dangers. Singapore has succeeded because we have been different. Although we are in close contact with the Western world, our values and expectations, and our responses to challenges as a people, have- so far been different from Westerners. Our population is not a Western one. Singaporeans can lose our original cultures, but we cannot really become yellow, brown, or black English gentlemen, or American WASPS. Nor do we want to be WOGs.

The MNCs know that while Singaporean workers are less strange to them than Taiwanese or Korean workers, we are nevertheless not the same as American ones. Otherwise, the MNCs would have no reason to come all the way across the Pacific. The plants they set up in Singapore could just as easily be built in Texas or California.

Our political institutions, imported from Britain, have also had to be adapted to suit our non-European population. To take two examples:

We had to abandon the system of trial By jury, which had evolved in Anglo-Saxon countries

like Britain and the US, and failed to work properly in our society.

We detain without trial secret society gangsters, drug pushers and other criminal elements, when there is insufficient evidence to convict them in court, but enough reason to believe that they were guilty. A Western public would consider this a violation of the human rights of the detainees, and would raise an uproar. But the Singapore public knows that the Criminal Law detentions keep our streets safe and crime-free, and supports the practice.

Singaporeans have had to be different because our environment is more difficult. South East Asia is not the US or Europe. The regional developments and the challenges to our survival which we must be prepared for are altogether different from those which worry Switzerland, for example, in the middle of Western Europe.

Problem is not unique to Singapore

This problem of response to Western influence is not unique to Singapore. Every non-Western developing country faces it - how to modernise without losing its soul, how to transform itself without undermining the basis of the whole society? Not all societies rise to the challenge.

In Iran, the Shah tried hard to modernise his feudal, backward country, but he failed. After the Shah, under the fundamentalist clerics, Iran turned inwards on itself, shutting out the rest of the world.

China, since the 19th century, has undergone periodic cyclas of opening its doors to the West, and then reverting

5

back to being a closed society. The upheavals and repeated changes of direction have exacted a huge cost in human life, misery, and stagnation.

The Philippines has accepted Western (particularly

American) institutions, such as the press, in toto. Theoretically, they have the highest number of human rights and freedoms of any country in the region. But the outcome has not been blissful - they have not enjoyed the benefits of what Americans call the "free market-place of ideas". Now many Filipinos want to cut their psychological ties with the US, in order to develop their own national spirit.

In Japan after 'World War II, General Douglas MacArthur imposed a Western political system on the country. But the Japanese found a way to transform it to function in a very un-Western fashion. The Japanese Diet works quite differently from the US Congress, or the British Parliament.

Singapore's problem is: how to be cosmopolitan, but yet not be rootless: how to have an open mind and be forward and outward looking, but still keep a clear sense of identity and self-confidence? We have no difficulty being cosmopolitan, because we are so open. Our problem is to retain our roots and identity.

We must build a Singapore identity

The long term survival of a country, especially a small one, depends in large measure on a strong sense of identity. For example, the Japanese are totally confident that their next generation will preserve a strong Japanese identity and values, despite the excesses of some Japanese youths. They are confident because they are convinced that they are a unique people, even to the point of absurdity. Some Japanese even believe that their intestines are a

6

different length, therefore they cannot eat American beef: that because of the Japanese language, their brains function differently from other peoples', and so on.

But the Japanese are both a one-race nation and a one-nation race. A strong sense of identity is easy for them, in fact even becomes a problem for them. Singapore is neither: not a one-race nation, nor a one-nation race. Can we be as confident that a distinct Singapore identity will automatically emerge? How will we hold together as one nation if it does not?

As the Prime Minister asked in a speech in Sydney recently, in 100 years' time, countries like Australia, Taiwan or Japan will still exist and be recognisable. What about Singapore?

why do we need a National Ideology?

A clear set of values, strongly held and shared by Singaporeans, can help us to develop an identity, bond ourselves together, and determine our own future. With a common understanding of what we as Singaporeens believe in, we can absorb what we want from the practices of other countries, without blindly following irrelevant American or European standards.

This is all we mean by a national ideology. It is the characteristic ethos and spirit of a people. It is the core values which the community shares, and which distinguishes them from other peoples and countries. It is the beliefs which underpin their social and political institutions. Of course, these beliefs evolve over time as the society changes, and they may or may not be well suited to the country's circumstances, and to the goals it sets for itself. Nevertheless, in this sense, every country has, de facto, a national ideology, and so do we.

7

So the question for Singapore really comes back to our common values. What are they? Do they serve us well? How are they changing? Because of the worrying natural drift of our population's attitudes, we need consciously to decide what core values to preserve, which ones to update, and how to transmit them to the next generation.

Many cultural heritages

The first major difficulty in working out such a set of core values is that we are a multi-racial, multi-religious society. We have not one culture or religion, but many. The great religions of our population encompass many universal values, yet we cannot use any one of them as a basis for a common identity. Which religion would we choose? At the same time, we cannot reinvent a complete new set of values, or a new heritage, from scratch.

Our approach must therefore be to recognise and respect this diversity of cultures and religions, and create out of it unity - as the Indonesians say bhinneka tunggal ika. Our task is three-fold: to find common values which all can share, to preserve the heritages of our different communities, and to ensure that each community also appreciates and is sensitive to the traditions of the others.

Common Core Values

One way is to identify certain abstract values, common to all Singaporeans, which draw on the essence of each of our heritages, and which all Singaporeans can share. Then we interpret and convey these ideas for each community, in terms of its own cultural and religious traditions. In time, very gradually, all communities can develop more common, distinctively Singaporean characteristics.

8

This is a slow and difficult process. But the only faster way is for all the communit ies to become equal ly decultured and Westernised, and therefore grow more similar to one another. Possibly a small minority of highly Westernised Singaporeans might welcome this. But I doubt if it would be acceptable to the majority of the populat ion, or especial ly to the minority communit ies. I doubt even more whether it would be a better solution for us.

Which abstract values?

What abstract values should we emphasise? I bel ieve we should emphasise non-political, non-rel igious values, and should keep the list to the minimum, in order to focus on the key items. The President identified four in his Address to Parliament:

Community over self,

Upholding the family as the basic building block of society,

Resolving major issues through consensus instead of contention, and

Stressing racial and religious tolerance and harmony.

These four items provide an adequate starting point for a National Ideology. They are compatible with Chinese, Malay, and Indian cultures, and with the values taught by the major religions. There will be many other values, such as hard-work, honesty, loyalty and justice, which Singaporeans ought to uphold, but these four are the key ones.

Relationship to National Flag and Pledge

The National Ideology will not be the first formal statement of our ideals. We already have the five stars on the state flag, and the National Pledge. Natural questions arise: What is the relationship between the National Ideology and these earlier statements? Do we really need another statement?

I believe we do. The five stars on the state flag represent ideals which our society strives for - democracy, equality, peace, progress, justice. The National Pledge reiterates these ideals, and reinforces the message that we should progress as one united nation, regardless of race, language, or religion. Neither the five stars nor the Pledge identifies what personal values Singaporeans must have to bring this about. The National Ideology will do so, and complement both.

Universal or Oriental values?

Some people have suggested that the National Ideology should contain universal ideals, rather than be a narrow statement specific to Singapore. In a way they are right. The core values can be said to be universal, because they all occur in some form in nearly every tradition. But that does not mean that our mix of values will fit any country, or that we can just adopt the values of any other country as our own. We have to find the correct balance and emphasis to suit our special circumstances.

I said earlier that our problem is Westernisation. Rut we should define more carefully what we mean by Westernisation. 'What is undesirable about Western values?

At one level, unrestrained materialism, individualism, permissiveness and drug culture. Most people would concede this readily, including many Westerners. But these are aberrations rather than ideals. Suppose we discard them, and retain only the best of Western society, will those ideals fit us? If we adopt them wholesale, can they help Singapore to survive? Do we want to become such a country?

Some have argued that Singaporeans should be citizens of the world, comfortable everywhere but belonging nowhere in particular, upholding universal values and feeling a brotherhood with all mankind. Rut we belong to a time and a place, with a past which we should be proud of, and a future which is ours to make. If we are not aware of this, within one generation, or at most two, the spirit of Singapore will disappear, the society will dissolve, and the nation will be no more.

No group of people can jettison their past, embrace another culture, and survive intact. Sometimes individuals do that, for example Asians who migrate to the US or Canada, or who have grown up in Western societies. In time they or their children become as close to being Westerners as possible, short of belonging to the majority, dominant racial group - which is a significant gap. It is one way for individuals to survive, but not for a whole society.

Even within a Western society like the United States, which is supposedly a melting pot blending different cultures into one nation, different communit ies zealously maintain their separate traditions and identities. For example, many American Blacks vehemently reject WASP values. As one Black writer, John Wideman, said:

I examine minutely the place I come from, repeat its stories, sing its songs, preserve its language

and values, because they make me what I am and because if I don't. who will?1

We should therefore take a conservative but not unquestioning approach: retain our own heritages, but examine than for values which need to be modified, and scrutinise foreign traditions for ideas which can be incorporated, but do so cautiously. Our roots are important. We should not be root-bound, but neither should we abandon our roots. They anchor us, and will help us to grow.

Society above self

One major difference between Oriental and Western societies is the relative importance each places on the group and on the individual. In general, Western societies place more weight on the individual, while Oriental societies tend to place more on the group.

Western ideals emphasise the rights and privileges of the individual over the group, and particularly over the state. Western societies prize individual fulfilment - what the American Declaration of Independence called "the pursuit of happiness", and order their affairs accordingly. Oriental societies believe in individuals fulfilling themselves through the greater identity of the group. The Chinese cal1 it " 4r!i 4!k /lx 3% 9 x & h e4 " - sacrificing the smaller self, to achieve the greater self. This emphasis on other-directed values - communitarian values - on duties

above rights - is one of the distinguishiny features of the NICS, and in the view of many sociologists, a key factor in their success.

1 Quoted in Dialogue, No. 83, l/89. -Pg. 44

12

I am not suggesting that Westerners are incapable of selfless service to others, or that there are no selfish people in the Orient. But there is a real difference between East and West. Of course, every society contains strands of both communitarian and individual drives. Every society must find its own balance between the two - between individual and society, rights and responsibilities, competition and cooperation.

So must we. We are in this respect an Oriental society, and should remain one. If we swing to the other extreme, and accept uncritically the more unrestrained 'Western views of the absolute supremacy of individual rights and liberties - views which are challenged even in the West, we will be ruined.

Confucianism

Some Singaporeans, particularly from the minority communities, have reacted to the idea of a National Ideology with hesitation. They fear that it will be a disguise for imposing Chinese Confucian values on them. Indeed, when 1DPM first raised the subject, some Chinese newspapers saw it as the elevation of Confucian ethics to a national status. This misunderstanding has to be dispelled, and the relationship between the National Ideology and Confucian ethics clarified.

The National Ideology is for all communities. Confucian ethics are not. But the Chinese community, in order to elaborate the abstract values of the National Ideology into concrete examples and vivid stories, must draw upon Confucian concepts, for several reasons:

It is the heritage of the Chinese part of our population.

It stresses the importance of placing society above self, a key value we want to preserve.

Many Confucian ideals are still relevant to us. in example is the concept of government by honourable men " g 3 "(junzi), who have a duty to do right for the people. and who have the trust and respect of the population. This fits us better than the Western concept: that a government should be given as limited powers as possible, and always treated with suspicion unless proven otherwise.

However, the National Ideology cannot just be Confucianism by another name. Firstly, the government cannot force Confucianism on the other communities, or even allow it to lead to Chinese chauvinism, narrowing the outlook of Chinese Singaporeans, and making them more intolerant of the other communities. The government has never let the majority race impose itself on the minority communit ies in Singapore. It does not intend to do so now.

Secondly, we need to realise that Confucianism does not have a monopoly of virtue. Precepts and practices evolved for a rural, agricultural society have to be revised to fit an urban, industrial society. Confucianism must be brought up to date, and reconciled with other ideas, for example democracy and the rule of law, which have already become part of our ethos..

one notable modification will be to the Confucian concept of family ties. In China, where traditionally family ties are paramount, this practice led to favouritism Of relatives by officials. But in Singapore, we have adopted a clear separation between public office and official duty on the one hand, and private interests and personal obligations on the other. This has enabled us to run a clean and efficient bureaucracy, free of nepotism.

14

Traditional Confucian family relationships are also strictly hierarchical. Sons owe an absolute duty of filial piety and unquestioning obedience to fathers. Males take precedence over females, brothers Over sisters, and the first born over the second over the third son. But in Singapore, the parent-child relationship is more respectful rather than one of absolute subordination. Sons and daughters are treated more equally, because of family planning. The relationship between older and younger siblings is less authoritarian. Even China is now trying to achieve this.

In ail these respects, our practice must continue, without loosening cohesion and loyalty within the family unit. Care and responsibility for the old and the young is still very much a family matter in Singapore. It should remain so, and should never be left to the state. This has happened in the Nest, and there are already signs that it is also starting to happen here.

Other Heritages

Just as the Chinese will interpret the core values of the National Ideology in terms of Confucian teachings, Malays and Muslims will elaborate them in terms of Malay traditions and Islamic teachings, and the Indians in terms of Indian traditions. I am not an expert in Islam, but I understand from my Muslim colleagues that Malays and Muslims would find nothing unacceptable in the four items of core values. When I discussed this talk with a few of them, they produced verses from the Quran teaching these same points.

On family values, for example, they tell me that according to Islam, a child at birth is like a clean, white cloth. What "colour" it takes later in life depends on the parents, who are responsibie to briny up the child properly. The child, on the other hand, has a life-long duty to take care of his or her parents.

'

15

On the importance of the community above self, the Malay practice of "gotong-royong" is an expression of concern for the well-being of neighbours, and a sacrifice of personal interest for the common good.

The concept of consensus translates directly into the tradition of "musyawarah", or consultation among the community to decide on a course of action'.

On multi-racial and multi-religious tolerance and harmony, Prophet Mohammed taught tolerance and good neighbourliness to all, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. l

The elaborations of the core values into the different traditions will not be identical. The Muslim idea of a family is not the same as the Confucian idea of filial piety. Muslim family law does not apply to Chinese or Hindus. We must respect these different interpretations, rather than force them to coincide. It is part of our diversity.

Democracy

Although the National Ideology embodies non- political, personal values, it cannot be- completely separated from the politics of Singapore. It must complement, not replace, our system of democracy. Singapore cannot be governed effectively except by a democratically elected government. Without the consent of the people, no government can achieve anything.

However, democracy is not an automatic formula for political success. To make it work, the people need to have the right values, understanding and sense of responsibility. our core values should contribute to this.

16

In particular, for the Chinese community, we must reconcile Confucian values with the concepts of democracy. Confucian values cannot substitute for participatory, consensual democracy, or be used as a tool to keep the

population cowed and submissive. We cannot accept the Confucian idea that " RneEb4, ;I;Ti55%2 " -

"the people can be made to follow a path of action, but they may not be made to understand it". 2 If in a democracy the population do not understand and support the goals of the government, they will not work to achieve these objectives.

One final sceptical doubt sometimes expressed is that the whole idea of a National Ideology is nothing more than a scheme to perpetuate, or perpetrate, PAP rule. Personally I find it difficult to see how a proposal to strengthen core values can become a subterfuge to fix opposition parties. I have not heard any political party in Singapore arguing that the family should not be the basic building block of society, or claiming that conflict is a better way to solve national problems than consensus building.

In fact, it is not critical whether the PAP or another equally trustworthy party forms the Government. What is critical is that the country's integrity must be upheld. Our real concern is that if Singaporeans become fractious and divided, nobody can govern Singapore. The National Ideology tries to make this outcome less likely.

2 Analects, Bk VIII Ch 9

17

The Next Step

Now that Singaporeans have spent some time discussing this subject, the next step is to debate it in Parliament, invite public views, and reach a consensus on the key values which it should contain. We should then formulate a credo, a short formal statement of faith similar to the National Pledge, restating the key principles. This is relatively straight-forward.

After that, we should systematically work these values into our way of life. We need to inculcate them through our various cultural heritages, in the different communities, and especially in the next generation. This will take many years, and will be much harder.

We will need to entrench and transmit these values in schools, in homes, and in the life of our society. The schools will have a major role to play. Teaching of the second language is important, not only as a vehicle for imparting values, but also because knowledge of the mother tongue is a vital part of a person's identity and sense of self-worth. Values can be taught overtly, in moral education and social studies classes, but also indirectly, through many other subjects. In changing from old text-books to new teaching materials like CLIPS, we have unintentionally narrowed the texts to strictly language teaching, and removed much of the values content of the old books. This was a grave mistake, which must be put right.

What will our future be?

In discussing the National Ideology, we are really pondering the future of Singapore. What does the future hold for us?

18

As we develop economically, will we also naturally evolve into a successful copy of a Western society? If so, we have nothing to worry about. We can just let everything happen by itself, and all will be well.

Or is our fate inevitable and tragic: as we develop, we become superficially Westernised, cast off from our traditional moorings, drift into banks and shoals, and come to grief?

Or will we, through deliberate effort, retain and strengthen our identity, one which is distinct from other societies, and continue to prosper, achieving political stability, freedom from want, human dignity and fulfilment for ourselves?

The answer must be decided by Singaporeans ourselves. We have the right, and the responsibility, to determine our own future.

M14/M2/Pgs.l-18