Registrar of Societies should ban Inter-Racial Confidence Circles

I am shocked. 

The Registrar of Societies (ROS) should immediately step in and ban the Inter-Racial Confidence Circles (IRCCs), since the latter are acting against the public interest. 

The ROS has established a clear precedent when it comes to such societies, and he should follow his own established practice by acting as firmly against IRCCs as he acted against People Like Us (PLU). 

In the case of PLU, the Registrar cited two clauses in the Societies Act which mandated that he should refuse registration. These two clauses are: 

4(2)(b) The society is likely to be used for unlawful purposes or for purposes prejudicial to public peace, welfare or good order in Singapore; and 

4(2)(d) It would be contrary to the national interest for the society to be registered.

In an email to Associated Press, and reported by AP, the ROS explained his line of thinking: "As the mainstream moral values of Singaporeans are conservative, it is hence contrary to public interest to grant legitimacy to the promotion of homosexual activities and viewpoints." 

The same logic applies to racial and religious views, and the ROS has a duty to be consistent. Since the mainstream values of Singaporeans are racist, therefore it must surely be contrary to the public interest to grant legitimacy to the promotion of racial harmony and related views. 

That Singaporeans are racist is obvious from the simple fact that some people, quite outlandishly, think that IRCCs are needed. This apparently includes the Deputy Prime Minister, who has brazenly addressed the IRCCs in a warm message recently. 

Other indicators of mainstream racist values include the way Chinese Singaporeans looked at all Muslims and sarong-wearers with grave suspicion after the arrests of Jemaah Islamiah members in December 2001. Our mother-tongue policy is also an instructive indicator of our precious values. Here in Singapore, we define your mother-tongue not by what language your mother speaks to you in, but by the colour of your skin, and if you are of mixed lineage, by the colour of your father's skin. 

Therefore, the aims of the IRCCs go against the conservative mainstream values of Singaporeans, and, as shown by the precedent of banning PLU, a contrarian stance is enough reason to have IRCCs banned for being

• likely to be used for unlawful purposes,

• prejudicial to public peace, welfare and good order and

• contrary to the national interest.

Proscribing IRCCs is eminently the right thing to do, as we should not legitimize the promotion of inter-racial activities and viewpoints Their activities would be offensive to conservative Singaporeans who do not wish their mindsets challenged.  

The ROS used this same line of reasoning when he said the aim of PLU to promote gay tolerance and reduce homophobia could not be legitimised. Presumably, the ROS realized that conservatives do not want their attitudes changed. 

In both cases, it would be "prejudicial to the peace" of mind of these stalwart citizens of Singapore. Moreover, since the conservative interest equates with the national interest, we are thus on solid legal ground to declare them to be "contrary to the national interest." 

Finally, just as the ROS issued a stern warning to PLU, that there are "provisions in the law for the imposition of heavy penalties on organizers and members of unregistered societies," so the ROS should issue a similar warning to IRCCs. Just because the Deputy Prime Minister supported the IRCCs should not make our fearless civil servants quiver in their slippers and turn a blind eye to this serious subversion of the public peace and national interest of Singapore.

© Yawning Bread 

Footnotes

None

Addenda

None