General Paper - AJC: GP - total freedom of speech v.s. social responsibility eugene
play around with the bounceicles. drag them round. jump on them. and more!

Thursday, July 12, 2007
「 bouncing away Thursday, July 12, 2007 」
In the context of Singapore’s multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, I feel that both authors’ views should be adopted for optimum freedom of expression amongst us. While it is seems reasonable for us, people living in a democratic country, to demand for unlimited freedom of speech, it is still important for us to see the importance of practicing social responsibility.

Imagine a country where many people from different races, backgrounds, religion and beliefs are living together. If everyone is allowed to practice unlimited freedom of speech, without sparing a thought for how others around them will be affected by their action, it will lead to conflict between the various groups of people. For example if the Chinese keeps passing racist remarks about the Malays or critizing the teachings of Islam, the latter will be very unhappy about it. This problem, if not solved in time, will snow-ball itself to pose an even greater threat such as racial riots. In addition, they may feel unwanted in Singapore’s society since they are the minority race group here. Either way, such racial and social problems disrupts Singapore’s rapidly booming economy. People go on strikes and are unwilling to work, foreign investors and tourists feel unsecured visiting, armed forces and resources used to maintain security within the country rather than on more constructive efforts to build up security against foreign aggression, and the list goes on. This is definitely not the description of a first world country, not a country that we call Singapore.

On the other hand, basic freedom of speech cannot be neglected in Singapore. If people do not practice social responsibility in communication, the government will then have no choice but to pass down stricter laws against the freedom of speech. Such a system, if brought to extremity, may result in a modern variation of how Hitler created a totalitarian society in Germany during the second World War.

Thus I feel that people should practice social responsibility when it comes to commenting about such sensitive racial issues. Indeed, as raised by Singer in the first passage, “freedom of speech is essential to democratic regimes” but one must be responsible to exercise utmost discretion when dealing with the more sensitive issues, such as race and religion.


Signing off, [buttman01].

...
|