Commentary: ‘Softer’ approach with moral suasion better at dismantling racist mindsets
SINGAPORE: The announcement of the new Maintenance of Racial Harmony Deed past Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the National Day Rally (NDR) signals a shifting of gears in managing Singapore's race relations.
While the Act consolidates the state's legislative instruments in dealing with bug of race, of particular significance are its "softer, gentler touches" as PM Lee termed.
These enable the state to compel offending individuals to cease communicating or acting in a style potentially jeopardising racial harmony.
Just more importantly, there will be provisions for those who breach the police to mend ties with aggrieved communities past learning more about them, proffer apologies and cultivate understanding.
LIMITS TO HARD LEGISLATION
This move to codify softer approaches to managing race relations is a paradigm shift from that of yesteryears.
Since Singapore's independence, although inter-religious and inter-racial closed door dialogues dot the mural, an array of robust legal implements has been the centrepiece of country policy to cultivate a harmonious social fabric.
Difficult legislation — such as the Sedition Act and Section 298A of the Penal Code ( where any expression or act that potentially offends anyone of a item race or religion tin can consequence in a conviction) — coupled with active enforcement are seen every bit essential to preserving the peace.
They discourage individuals from racially inflammatory acts. Offenders face a penalty of up to 3 years imprisonment and an unspecified fine.
A number of cases in contempo months involving racist remarks hurled at a hospital nurse, a supermarket cashier, a bus passenger, likewise equally a Twitter parody account accept resulted in jail terms beingness slapped for offensive statements. Several others have also received fines and stern warnings previously.
Such a strategy is effective insofar as information technology largely deters blatant acts of racism or religious discrimination in public settings. Its efficacy is axiomatic by how our diverse communities have co-existed peacefully for over half a century despite such incidents cropping up from fourth dimension to time.
Nonetheless, this approach has its downsides. First, the broad scope of such legislation and strict policing of racial and religious bug can result in an unintended just significant chilling outcome on public appointment through framing such issues equally matters of crime and punishment.
Reliance on policing and enforcement every bit principal mechanisms to keep the peace shifts attention away from efforts to identify the root cause of whatever injustices felt, analyze such issues and forestall similar sentiments in hereafter.
2nd, but witnessing the law brought to bear on perpetrators of racism provides scant resolution for transgressors, aggrieved parties and bystanders alike.
For communities on the receiving end of prejudice, in that location is no guarantee penalty will induce remorse, reflection, and resolve on the office of wrongdoers to set things right; even if information technology may be immediately gratifying when the perpetrator is taken to task.
In some instances, information technology may instead strengthen problematic attitudes or behavior. Individuals on the receiving end of warnings, jail time or financial penalties may well be angered, even resentful – especially if there is no concurrent effort to engage them, shed light on and debunk the logic motivating their behaviour.
Delving into the reasons behind bad behaviour, enabling date betwixt invested individuals with distinct perspectives, and rehabilitating wrongdoers are every bit, if non more important in securing a long-term resolution.
To exist clear, this does not backbite from the demand to mete consequences for bad behaviour. Hence our current legislative arsenal should be continually fortified. But nosotros must exercise more than than just defining right and incorrect with law.
WHY MORAL SUASION WORKS
One may refrain from passing racist remarks in public for fearfulness of the potential consequences – such equally legal penalties or being "cancelled" on social media.
Nonetheless, this does not do much to convince individuals to actively cheque their biases undergirding actions. Innate attitudes and beliefs drive overt actions and behaviours.
Rather than rely solely on the stick of the police, we should as well focus on moulding mindsets to raise public understanding of race relations and encourage individuals to act responsibly.
Confronting the backdrop of increasing polarisation and a plurality of perspectives globally on identity issues, the need to shape mindsets, promote engagement between individuals with diverse views, and enhance inclusivity has become always more than disquisitional.
For those who have erred unwittingly or otherwise, a sense of self-awareness and openness can aid them to acknowledge responsibility and make apology.
These preventive approaches often yield more durable and long-lasting positive impacts relative to the reactive threat of punishment.
In a recent incident involving a polytechnic lecturer levelling racist remarks at an interracial couple in public, the lecturer has since apologised to the couple and the wider community. This is a first step signalling the transgressor understands the mistake of his means and acknowledges the hurt caused.
Listen to Mathew Mathews and other observers discuss what young people in Singapore want out of conversations regarding race on CNA's Heart of the Matter podcast
Certainly, apologies or acts of remorse may well exist undertaken solely to avoid further punishment. But information technology goes some way to effect healing for aggrieved parties and opens up possibilities for further meaningful appointment.
Moral suasion is additionally a robust response to the limits of legislation. Laws must be constantly updated in line with new avenues of interaction, online or otherwise, to finer tackle acts inimical to racial harmony.
Shifting notions of what is socially acceptable over time must also be considered in strengthening legislation. Some actions we consider racist today may not accept been perceived similarly in the past.
A few decades agone, wearing facial makeup to depict characters of other races on TV or the silver screen might have been par for the course in eliciting humour.
Today, with an enhanced understanding of the offence and upset such portrayals engender beyond various country contexts, blackface or brownface is at all-time controversial, and at worst, reprehensible, beyond age cohorts.
Against this properties, a focus on cultivating empathy and understanding encourages individuals to conduct themselves virtuously regardless of circumstances or the threat of punishment.
Of class, influencing "hearts and minds" is undeniably a far harder task than checking undesirable behaviour through fear of repercussions. This quest has to be attempted from an early stage, with the role of families and schools critical in inculcating the correct values from the start.
SUSTAINING ENGAGEMENT AND REFRESHING POLICIES
Our approach to managing race should be ane where people feel comfortable enough to embark on aboveboard discussions; withal are cognisant of sensitivities. This can be done by encouraging meaningful interactions and augmenting the common space.
Such engagements will not come easy. It will nigh certainly result in tension, frayed nerves and offence on occasion.
It is unrealistic to expect everyone to coherently and dispassionately appoint with each other, given how many of us are emotionally invested in, or have lived experiences different from others that shape our views particularly for minorities, who expectedly face more challenges in their daily lives.
Nevertheless our natural defensiveness when airing diametrically opposed viewpoints volition crave skilled, tactful engagement.
For instance, highly personal interactions that can result in visceral emotions, should be held in closed-door settings and ground rules set to ensure all in attendance strive to mind with empathy and withhold judgment.
This should exist done with the intent to protect individuals sharing their views from unwanted and unwarranted scrutiny or mischief – from those not privy to context and insidious actors.
Where date leads to unintentional offence, we should seek to be more forgiving and empathetic, as opposed to apportioning arraign, imposing penance and demanding redress.
Engagement aside, the Regime'southward refreshed arroyo to managing race relations may also entail a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of prevailing policies including the CMIO classification, the Ethnic Integration Policy and the role of self-help groups - key planks in how nosotros have dealt with race for decades.
The intention to conform these, withal, should be done advisedly. Perhaps with fourth dimension, as common spaces become wider, we tin review these racial harmony workhorses.
The policy modify appear during NDR on wearing the tudung in the public health sector is a adept first step in illustrating the calibrated arroyo the Regime is taking in ensuring inclusivity.
A delivery to meet through the above will enable Singapore to remain socially cohesive, while standing to reap the benefits of a diverse population.
Mathew Mathews is Caput of the Social Lab and Principal Enquiry Fellow at the Found of Policy Studies, National Academy of Singapore. Melvin Tay is Research Acquaintance at the IPS.
Source: https://cnalifestyle.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/racism-singapore-multiculturalism-law-national-day-rally-295686
0 Response to "Commentary: ‘Softer’ approach with moral suasion better at dismantling racist mindsets"
Post a Comment