National Identity
Singapore is a very young and culturally diverse nation which often struggles with how to define its national identity. What does it mean to be a Singaporean? How has our national identity been shaped by our history, by multiculturalism and our values as a nation, as a whole?
Before we examine the concept of a Singaporean national identity, it is important to understand how Singapore became a nation and who its citizens are. Established in 1819 as a British colony, much of Singapore’s early population growth was due to immigration until World War II. Pre-war Singapore attracted large numbers of labourers from India, China and the Malay Archipelago. As a result, the colony’s population grew from several hundred to half a million by the time a census was taken in 1931.
Immigration momentarily ceased during the Japanese occupation (1942 - 1945) while Singapore’s road to independence in the 1950s and 1960s saw the passing of new regulations that limited immigration to only those who contributed to its socioeconomic development. Stricter immigration laws and citizenship requirements were enforced following Singapore’s separation from Malaysia in 1965. It was not until the 1980s, when Singapore became more industrialized that the question of migration returned. In the last decade especially, large numbers of new immigrants and correspondingly new cultures have begun to have an impact on the nation’s foundations.
As a relatively new country with 49 years of independence, Singapore’s unique cultures and traditions have had little time to take root. Instead, a large portion of what is perceived as ‘Singaporean culture’ has been inherited from generations of immigrants who arrived from China, India, and the Malay Archipelago. The generation of the pioneers who first came to modern Singapore brought with them resilience, fortitude, and endurance to bear hardship. These values still hold true today.
Unlike older nations like Italy, Spain, Japan or China, Singaporeans are not homogeneous, and do not share a history, language or culture that are centuries old. Our main languages are Malay, Tamil, Mandarin and English. Unlike newer nations like the United States or Australia, Singaporeans find it difficult to identify core concepts that power the national narrative, in the way that words like “liberty” and “democracy” do for Americans notes Singapore intellectual Kishore Mabubani.
As Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong once noted in Parliament, “Singapore may be a relatively new concept, but a Singaporean can pick another out from a crowd in a foreign place. You don’t have to wait for him to speak. You just look at him, see how he walks, his body language,” he said. The Ministry of Community, Youth and Culture of Singapore has no doubt that we have a Singaporean national identity. Its website states “A strong national identity builds a sense of belonging among Singaporeans. We strive to nurture a gracious and resilient nation, whose people remain rooted and loyal to Singapore in the face of globalisation and times of crises.”
A strong national identity builds a sense of belonging among Singaporeans
Singapore may be a relatively new concept, but a Singaporean can pick another out from a crowd in a foreign place.
The use of quotes and the inclusive “we” further contribute to the hybrid nature of this essay.
But what are the real markers of the Singaporean national identity? This question has grown more urgent recently as a rapid influx of foreigners over the past decade has stirred resentment over the strain on public infrastructure, the fierce competition for jobs, and, at a deeper level, a fear that the national identity, however undefined, was being diluted.
Sociologists have pointed out, and studies have shown that when a nation or country undergoes a military, cultural or economic threat, or when that nation becomes part of a foreign empire, national identity tends to become stronger. One example of this occurred in Poland, which was divided between Prussia (now Germany), Austria and Russia between 1795 and 1918. Even though the country no longer existed as an independent state, the people retained a strong sense of national identity. Another example is that of Taiwan: Taiwanese identity became much stronger after the fall of the Republic of China to the Communist government, then became stronger still after Communist China began to threaten Taiwan with military might and rhetoric.
And so it has been in Singapore in the past few years as tension between Singaporeans and foreigners have come to the surface. In August 2011, a family from China lodged a complaint against their Singaporean-indian neighbours for the smell of curry from their cooking. A Facebook page was set up, urging Singaporeans to prepare curry on a designated Sunday, and it drew more than 57,600 supporters.
A controversial Population White Paper projected the Singapore population to grow to a size of up to 6.9 million by 2030. Of this, about 3.8 million will be made up of Singapore citizens, with the rest permanent residents and foreigners on work passes. Citizens will number just 55% of the total population. It is currently 62%. If Singapore’s total fertility rate of 1.2 does not improve in the years to come, the group of bornand-bred Singaporeans will start to shrink in 2025. It would take the naturalisation of 15,000 to 25,000 new citizens annually to form 55 per cent of 2030’s projected population.
But this influx of new citizens should not be an obstacle to how Singapore grows and prospers. Many of Singapore’s pioneer generation of leaders postindependence were “new citizens.” Even deputy Prime Minister S. Rajaratnam, who wrote the words of the Singapore Pledge, was born a Ceylonese. “Being a Singaporean is not a matter of ancestry,” he once said. “It is conviction and choice.”
“Respect for multiracial and religious practices” as a top marker of the Singaporean identity.
Can the Singapore national identity evolve with the inflow of new immigrants and expand while surviving intact? Surveys show that while new citizens and local Singaporeans share some common ideas of what goes into “Singaporean-ness,” they also differ in some key ways. In a 2010 survey of 2,000 citizens – 50% local-born, 50% foreign-born - the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) found that both groups ranked “respect for multiracial and religious practices” as a top marker of the Singaporean identity. But they disagreed on the institution of National Service, considered a rite of passage by Singaporean men: 69% of localborn citizens said that having a male child who has completed NS is an important characteristic of being “Singaporean”; only 43% of foreignborn citizens agreed.
Still, others believe that the work of strengthening national identity requires just patience and perspective.
The Singapore state has only 50 years behind it, Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing noted. In contrast, the US Declaration of Independence was written in 1776 while the Commonwealth of Australia Act, creating one entity from the Australian colonies, was passed in 1900.
The truth is, Singapore is still a very young nation, and our national identity is still being forged.