Today I did a couple of things that might have been wrong.
I got fed up with MRT commuters that I deliberately pushed an oncoming MRT passenger. I felt his buay-songness as he shoved back.
I'm not feeling exactly proud of it now, but after-the-fact, I think about the fact that Singapore's social engineering isn't working in some of the areas it SHOULD work. Commuter courtesy is definitely something that leaves much to be desired.
I really shouldn't have pushed that oncoming innocent fella, but I was just so fed up that people don't know what to do, despite them being in the same situation as I have been many times.
Why can't people just understand that they need to step aside when people need to move out?
This line of thinking got me started on... the notion that Singapore is really a place where there are first-class infrastructure and maybe, third-world people. I know that phrase is a cliche but still, I can't help but think that the notion is quite spot on.
Which leads me once again, to the acknowledgment that there are many different Singapore(s) that there are sections of Singaporeans that live life very differently from that presented by the government. Which means there are rifts and gaps that need to be SEEN, and bridges need to be built. Some of these rifts are taboos, words spoken in private, but hardly in public... Things need to be seen as they are, not imagined to be, nor glossed over.
Some stray thoughts that jumped...
Education is the key to... courtesy? One could imagine comparing commuter behaviour between the rush hour traffic on weekday mornings, which compose of office executives... and the commuter behaviour during weekend rush periods. Different crowds, different behaviours, perhaps?
Because in the weekday rush hour, people do get out from trains at stations to let people alighting passengers exit. Whereas in the weekend evening rush hour... civility... ?
I am making some casual correlations, and observational studies might prove or disprove my correlations. And of course, the golden adage in all statistical studies: correlation is not causation. Anyhow, the observation of different behaviours might also be the result of entirely different reasons, reasons that are independent of education level or socio-economic status. Carefully designed social experiments might be able to tease the details out. But one wonders whether the appearance/inner gaze of the office suit and its behavioural entailments might figure in somewhere.
Next, I wonder about foreign workers, and thinking about their social integration... but thats an open-ended thought, which leads to nowhere, at least for now.
More importantly, I'm looking at the notion of different Singapore(s), because like I said earlier, I stood opposite someone who might be called an Ah Beng, who professed, in his conversations to his young brother, to aspire to be a gangleader, summoning man with the twitch of his finger. So somewhere along the lines, gangs have been romanticised, and the guy seems also to disregard his education, saying, 'whether i study or not, the results are still the same' which might seem to reflect nothing, until his young brother says he aspires to university and trash his elder brother in that area. Note also the coarse use of language.
The entire sequence on the train was rather... interesting. Fact that the supposed Ah Beng is still with his mum could mean that he is still at least, financially dependent on him, and that deep in his heart, he's still also a mother's boy who simply found alternative ways of social involvement (note: gangs) that might make his mother proud of him. But that might not be the case.
I mean, I don't know, actually. I wonder if its alright to say that these kids went 'wrong'. That might be politically, socially correct, but right/wrong statements are limiting. These statements merely 'state' things. Nothing changes. But if these people do commit socially destructive things - ie, hurting other people, hurting themselves, physically, emotionally... then... no one is better off, eh?
"Productive" is such an economic term, I avoid it. But one can't help but feel that something went wrong in their lives... some misguidedness.
Anyhow, this post is going nowhere.
I really wanted to talk about education, and how the parenting and social environment very much affects the individual's response to it.
I really wanted to talk too, about the kind of education that exists, and I think I finally get it! We receive an Administrative-ended education, an education system that really trains people to become administrators. Even university is not untouched by that attitude. Really smart people get training and amazing things do get done, but within a box, within a system. While that is really cool and all, the box exists.
But then, every education system is the same in that respect. People do become administrators, oversee, supervise, project management, plan... Very, very few visionaries. They are rare, hence highly sought after, anyhow. Hmm... something to mull about. Singapore has smart people. A lot of them. And there are mindblowing things being done. But... but... something is missing, eh?
Shall blog about these things another time, another space.
Posts
