User:Haessals/sandbox

Race in Singapore

The concept of race or ethnicity in contemporary Singapore emerged from British colonial attitudes towards race. Today, the Chinese-Malay-Indian-Others (CMIO) model is the dominant organising framework of race in Singapore. Race informs government policies on a variety of issues such as political participation, public housing and education. However, the state’s management of race, as well as the relevance of the CMIO model, has been a point of contention amongst some in recent years.

Historical Background

The practice of classifying the local population based on their races or ethnicities was born out the British colonial practices. Race categories were enshrined through local censuses and the issuance of identity cards. In the early British censuses of British Malaya, racial lines were often drawn by birthplace and linguistic or linguistic group. In these censuses, labels such as ‘Hokkien’, ‘Boyanese’ and ‘Bengali’ being used. In the 1891 census, races began to be grouped into broader categories such as Chinese, Malay, and Indian.

Up till the 20th century, the largely first and second-generation immigrant population retained strong ties to their respective homelands. These communities continued to influenced by the ideological movements in their homelands. Such movements included the Chinese civil war, the struggle for independence in then-British India, and the decolonisation efforts in peninsula Malaya and Indonesia. As such, each immigrant community maintained their own sense of indigeneity.

When Singapore was part of the Federation of Malaysia from 1963 to 1965, inter-racial tensions were rife, culminating in incidents such as the 1964 Race Riots. At the same time, Singaporean political leaders such as Lee Kuan Yew began to advocate for a “Malaysian Malaysia”, opposing the Malaysian Federal Government’s vision of an ethnic-based Malay Malaysia.

After Singapore’s split from Malaysia, the Singapore government pushed for the development of a “Singaporean Singapore” identity based on racial equality, with race acting as a secondary identifier alongside the Singaporean national identity. Special rights for Malays were legislated into the Singapore Constitution, symbolically recognising the community as the indigenous people of the land. Singapore also formally adopted four official languages - English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil - and implemented a bilingual education policy.

Government Policies

Language Policies

See also: Language planning and policy in Singapore

The four official languages (English, Chinese, Malay, Tamil) are recognised in Article 153 the Singapore Constitution. English is the language of administration, and is also seen as a common language for the different races to communicate with one another. Chinese, Malay and Tamil were designated as the ‘Mother Tongues’ of the three respective ethnic group. The then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in particular believed that learning one’s Mother Tongue helped maintain one’s understanding of cultural values.

A bilingual education policy was also introduced, mandating that students learn English as their first language and their respective Mother Tongues (determined by their officially registered race). Today, all students are expected to learn an official Mother Tongue Language. However, Singaporeans who have lived abroad for extended periods as well as international students may be granted exemptions from the Mother Tongue language requirement on a case-by-case basis.

Racial Harmony Day

See also: Racial Harmony Day

Racial Harmony Day is celebrated on 21 July, on the anniversary of the 1964 Race Riots. First launched in 1997 by the Ministry of Education in schools, the event has since expanded in reach. Today, grassroots organisations such as the People’s Association and the Community Development Councils also celebrate Racial Harmony Day.

Debates about Race in Singapore

The Singapore state’s treatment of race has also faced criticism from some academics. Scholar S. Velayutham argues that the state’s constant focus on the “spectre of racial violence has literally erased the notion of racism from public and official discourses”. Velayutham also argues and that “the need to maintain racial harmony, social cohesion and tolerance is repeatedly voiced to render racists practices as non-occurrences”. Other scholars such as N. Purushotam take issue with the orientalist underpinnings of the CMIO classification, and argue that continued adherence to the model merely avoids reconceptualisation of the term “race”. The “Others” category has also been criticised, with scholar Elaine Ho contending that the grouping of ethnic groups into the category “glosses over their social heterogeneity and different needs”.

Nevertheless, CMIO framework retains majority mainstream support amongst Singaporeans. A joint-survey by Channel NewsAsia and the Institute of Policy Studies showed that a majority of respondents believed that the CMIO classification helps build trust between the races (69%), fosters greater interaction between races (69%) and safeguards minority rights (71%). In an interview with local newspaper TODAY, the survey’s lead researcher Mathew Mathews said that “[t]he answer is not dismantling the framework, the answer is to ensure that all the communities continue to be embracing (of others).”

Criticism and controversies

Main accusations and criticisms faced by the genre and industry as a whole include:

Music and Visuals

K-Pop has at times faced criticisms from journalists who perceive the music to be formulaic and unoriginal. Accusations of plagiarism are also rampant, with K-Pop groups often being accused of plagiarizing Western music acts in particular. In addition, K-Pop has been criticized for its reliance on English phrases, with critics dubbing the use of English in titles “meaningless”.

K-Pop groups have been regularly accused on cultural appropriation of cultures such as African American culture, especially due to the frequent use of cornrows and bandanas in idol groups' on-stage styling. K-Pop groups have also been accused of appropriating Native American and Indian cultures. However, debate exists about whether the borrowing of cultural elements from cultures outside of Korea indeed constitutes cultural appropriation, or if this cultural appropriation is negative at all. Scholar Crystal S. Anderson writes that “[a]ppropriating elements of a culture by taking them out of their original context and using them in a completely different way does not automatically constitute negative cultural appropriation.”

Industry Practices

Corruption

In 2002, Time magazine reported that Korean television producers such as Hwang Yong-woo and Kim Jong-jin had been arrested for "accepting under-the-table payments guaranteeing TV appearances to aspiring singers and musicians" in a bid to tackle "systemic corruption in South Korea's music business". Companies investigated included SidusHQ and S.M. Entertainment.

Exploitation and Poor Living Conditions

K-pop management companies have also been criticized for exploitation of idols through overwork and restrictive contracts, described as "slave contracts" in a BBC report. According to The Hollywood Reporter, "Korea’s entertainment business is notoriously improvisational and unregulated. In-demand K-pop stars – many of whom are teenage 'idols' – have been known to rehearse and perform without sleep."

In July 2009, S.M. Entertainment was taken to court by TVXQ and a Super Junior member, who alleged that their working conditions had led to adverse health effects. The court decision in the TVXQ lawsuit determined their contract with S.M. Entertainment void, and resultantly the Fair Trade Commission released contract templates to regulate industry conditions.

In 2014, South Korea passed a law to regulate its music industry, protecting idols aged under 19 from unhealthy labor practices and overtly sexualized performances.

Under the new law, underage stars will be guaranteed the basic rights to learn, rest and sleep, though exceptions can be made for projects requiring long-distance travel. Weekly working hours for children younger than 15 are not to exceed 35 hours, while minors aged 15-18 are limited to 40 hours. Minors cannot work between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. unless their guardians give consent. It will also be illegal to coerce minors into wearing revealing stage costumes or dancing sexually suggestive choreography routines.

Failure to comply with these regulations may lead to the equivalent of a US$10,000 fine.

Industry professionals such as SM Entertainment’s CEO Kim Young-min have defended the system, arguing that individuals trained within the system are “no different than typical middle or high school kids, who go to after-school programs to cram for college entrance exams”. Kim has also argued that there is a need to consider the expenses incurred by the company during the trainee period, including “facilities, equipment, costumes, and virtually everything the trainees need”.

Sexualization and Sexual Exploitation

The industry has been criticized for the sexualization of both male and female idols, with the sexualization of minors in particular being of concern. Critics such as James Turnbull of the Korean Pop Culture blog The Grand Narrative have argued young female idols are especially susceptible to pressures to wear revealing clothing or dance provocatively.

Sponsorships or "sponsor relationships" are a common form of sexual exploitation in the industry. Wealthy individuals will "sponsor" idols or trainees by giving them expensive gifts or by helping them land roles coverage in return for sexual favors.