4 ms·

>As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" its own. So the reaction to the accident was motivated at l

>As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" its own. So the reaction to the accident was motivated at least to some degree by race. I agree that it wasn't an example of race on race violence, and I don't think it was widely interpreted as such. Though I'll admit I'm not informed on the specifics of how it started, it certainly was nothing comparable to the riots that happened before Singapore was undeveloped. The riot isn't important in the context of the Amos Yee story except as an example of an event where Singapore was portrayed in a negative light in int'l press. The first instance of public violence in the nation for over 40 years made a great headline. I wasn't posting that article for the coverage of that event so much as to show how journalism in Sg. The Strait Times will literally never publish anything remotely critical of the dominant political coalition.

crdb 11y ago
No, it was not motivated by race. Around 9% of Singaporean citizen are Singaporean Indian and 58% of those are Tamil (I attended two weddings in the last 3 years where one of the couple was Tamil) - the same as the non-Singaporeans involved in the riot. There have already been two Singaporean Indian presidents (Devan Nair and S. R. Nathan, the latter the longest-serving in Singaporean history). It's hard to find a parallel with any Western country, because no Western country has as free an immigration policy for low income workers as Singapore does (the US has a large illegal immigrant population to meet demand, but the dynamics of that are very different) - around 12% of residents are on Work Permits (i.e. construction workers or domestic help) [1]. The Straits Time did not publish the event as a race-motivated riot because it wasn't - it was more about a bunch of drunk angry people burning a few cars - and that it wasn't was immediately obvious to the readers of the Straits Time (which include many non-Singaporeans; not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government). [1] http://population.sg/resources/population-composition/ http://population.sg/resources/population-composition/
- Fajita_Mane 11y ago
  >No, it was not motivated by race. You mentioned in your previous comment that it was a "customary" reaction to the accident. I'm no expert on the culture, but I'd assume that public drinking is a great deal more socially acceptable in South India. Singapore is lucky enough to be close to a tremendous supply of inexpensive human capital - even more so than the US/Mexico. Their immigration policy allows low-paying marine/construction jobs to be filled quickly, but workers' rights are essentially nonexistent. Those 12% of foreign workers are almost all guaranteed to be earning enough to support themselves and their families back home - and that's without the benefit of a minimum wage or membership in an effective union. This sort of public policy may attract foreign investment, but it's unfair to the workers that have made Sg rich and it's unlike anything seen in the rest of the developed world. >not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government Are you referring to the long-standing tradition of the PAP suing print journalists for libel? I was browsing the front page of their site after I looked up coverage of the riots. The biggest story currently is about a marine trade union leader and MP resigning in disgrace after embezzling funds. Nowhere in the story does it mention his involvement in the PAP. There's a reason they have the worst press freedom rating of developed countries.

crdb 11y ago

No, it was not motivated by race. Around 9% of Singaporean citizen are Singaporean Indian and 58% of those are Tamil (I attended two weddings in the last 3 years where one of the couple was Tamil) - the same as the non-Singaporeans involved in the riot. There have already been two Singaporean Indian presidents (Devan Nair and S. R. Nathan, the latter the longest-serving in Singaporean history). It's hard to find a parallel with any Western country, because no Western country has as free an immigration policy for low income workers as Singapore does (the US has a large illegal immigrant population to meet demand, but the dynamics of that are very different) - around 12% of residents are on Work Permits (i.e. construction workers or domestic help) [1]. The Straits Time did not publish the event as a race-motivated riot because it wasn't - it was more about a bunch of drunk angry people burning a few cars - and that it wasn't was immediately obvious to the readers of the Straits Time (which include many non-Singaporeans; not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government). [1] http://population.sg/resources/population-composition/ http://population.sg/resources/population-composition/

Fajita_Mane 11y ago
>No, it was not motivated by race. You mentioned in your previous comment that it was a "customary" reaction to the accident. I'm no expert on the culture, but I'd assume that public drinking is a great deal more socially acceptable in South India. Singapore is lucky enough to be close to a tremendous supply of inexpensive human capital - even more so than the US/Mexico. Their immigration policy allows low-paying marine/construction jobs to be filled quickly, but workers' rights are essentially nonexistent. Those 12% of foreign workers are almost all guaranteed to be earning enough to support themselves and their families back home - and that's without the benefit of a minimum wage or membership in an effective union. This sort of public policy may attract foreign investment, but it's unfair to the workers that have made Sg rich and it's unlike anything seen in the rest of the developed world. >not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government Are you referring to the long-standing tradition of the PAP suing print journalists for libel? I was browsing the front page of their site after I looked up coverage of the riots. The biggest story currently is about a marine trade union leader and MP resigning in disgrace after embezzling funds. Nowhere in the story does it mention his involvement in the PAP. There's a reason they have the worst press freedom rating of developed countries.