It was a pity that of all the things I said to the reporter, only one line was used. He quoted me as saying that "online petitions do not have a track record for effectiveness." I hope readers don't think I was dismissing the value of such efforts.

If I remember correctly, reporter Chua Hian Hou had asked me whether I thought such a petition would lead Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's government to change its mind about retaining Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises 'gross indecency' between men. I gave him that reply as quoted, but at the same time, I sensed the danger that such an honest opinion posed. Singaporeans are apt to think that unless a move is guaranteed of success, it would be better not to "take risks" and stay away from any activity that could be seen as political dissent.

In my conversation with Chua, I immediately added that even if chances are low, people should see signing petitions as normal democratic participation. In any other country, people would do this repeatedly for all sorts of campaigns. There shouldn't be any fear about speaking up and signing petitions.

Alas, the situation in Singapore is anything but normal. Even strongman Lee Kuan Yew noticed it after giving a talk at Nanyang Technological University.

Three from China, two from India and one from Vietnam - these foreign students lobbed six of the seven questions during the allocated question-and-answer session last night.

Only the first question for Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew came from a Singaporean.

But as the moderator began to wrap up the proceedings, MM Lee stopped him and asked: 'Is there no Singaporean who wants to ask a question?'

-- Straits Times, 5 October 2007,
Is there no S'porean who wants to ask a question?

I have observed the same phenomenon myself whenever I gave talks to students at colleges and universities. Even when Singaporeans outnumbered foreign students 10 to 1 in the audience, the majority of the questions would still come from the handful of foreigners.

In the Straits Times' forum pages of 10 October 2007, reader Danny Lee Kwok Hoong wrote to give his analysis of the problem.

At the recent ministerial forum at Nanyang Technological University, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew asked: 'Is there no Singaporean who wants to ask a question?' (ST, Oct 5).

I attribute the dearth of questions to two factors. Firstly, the education system in Singapore does not adequately promote inquisitiveness and critical thinking. As a parent, I still find that children are primed to absorb and regurgitate information, despite changes introduced by the Education Ministry.

Perhaps the generation that current teachers hail from is one which does not truly appreciate active engagement and expressiveness by students. It is still a talk-down culture: teacher teaches, pupils listen. If one questions too much, he is seen to be difficult or trying to be too clever.

While the Education Ministry may say that the pedagogy today is different, I would argue that schools in other countries have progressed faster in this area.

Secondly, the political culture in Singapore does not encourage one to speak up, let alone question. Due to Singaporeans' belief in the efficiency and stability of the Government, most are wired to accept that 'Government knows best'. The result is that we do not question as much as others.

This is compounded by what I see as an unhealthy 'upward-reverence culture'. One tends to 'revere' his supervisor or anyone seen to be of a higher status.

This culture does not encourage the openness required for the development of naturally inquiring minds. In fact, one who questions runs the risk of being perceived as uncooperative, and 'going against the grain' of being cohesive and efficient.

Therefore, the unquestioning Singaporean public behaviour is not a phenomenon. It is a culture characteristic of our nation. The positive side of this culture is that we are a cooperative and efficient people. We obey and move very quickly.

However, in the increasingly dynamic, highly competitive knowledge economy, it will become a problem. Singaporeans will lose out to their more expressive and confident foreign counterparts who would speak up without fear.

The same strong leadership that had overseen the development of our robust economy in the last four decades should now aim to maintain Singapore's competitiveness by fostering a new brand of economy, one characterised by open debate, lateral thinking and creativity.

That way, MM Lee will be kept much busier by Singaporeans in future forums.

Danny Lee put it very diplomatically -- "a culture characteristic of our nation". The positive side, he said, was that we are very capable servants. The downside, if I may paraphrase him, is that if this habit continues, Singapore is finished.

I agree.

Needless to say, a great part of the blame lies at Lee Kuan Yew's own feet. For 40 years, he's bludgeoned his political opponents and stared down anyone who dared speak up in dissent. His generation of Singaporeans -- the parents and teachers of today's students -- have internalised these conditions and are now passing on their ingrained fear of sticking out, especially against political authority, to the younger generation.

Our media have likewise done their part in cultivating a climate of deference to authority, framing pronouncements from ministers as pearls of wisdom for the benefit of the masses, and generally giving scant space or airtime to opposing views.

Singaporeans are so unfamiliar now with the sound of dissent that when we do hear it, we think it a signal to duck.

But the biggest joke of all is when I hear some of us cry out for the government to let up, loosen up.... give us a sign that the coast is clear, and that we can speak up. In other words, to wait for the government to give us the 'OK'.

It won't happen. This government is not going to let go of its worst instincts. They would rather drag Singapore down than trim their own span of control -- in that way, they are no different from the junta in Burma, just slicker economic managers.

The only people who can save Singapore are Singaporeans themselves. We begin by seizing back our right to ask tough questions and speak our minds. Overcoming our own fears. Standing up for what we believe in.

Signing petitions anonymously doesn't meet this standard. If anything, you become complicit in the spreading of fear. You signal to others who chance upon your indecipherable mark that you too think it unsafe to own up to your views, and you implicitly suggest that others should think and do likewise.

Surely you can do better for the sake of your own country.

Sign the petition at www.repeal377a.com now. With your real name.

© Yawning Bread