A few salient points were raised which I felt needed a response but I didn't have time earlier to give what I hope would be substantive answers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by warita
And no, I don't understand conflicts as you described them. So you said that people have their identity, religion and culture.... sure. They want to protect it.... I still see no problem. But why on earth do they push their ideas on others, who have a different belief?
|
What constitutes "pushing" is very subjective and it can often be very hard to see why some people don't see their actions as being "pushy". In this regard, everyone loves referring to religious and cultural beliefs, especially those linked to that
one particular religion that everyone loves to bash (as I once did, in my callow youth).
Try to imagine this: If you've found something wonderful that changed your life, and which you believe would also help the people you care deeply about, would you keep quiet about it? Your mum keeps telling you, while you're growing up, "Eat your vegetables. They're good for you." Is she being pushy, or is she just showing that she cares for you in her own limited way?
Let’s push this up a notch into a more controversial realm that I was very familiar with. Some five years ago, my country was caught up in a huge and extremely unpleasant debate over whether to repeal legislation that criminalises sodomy between men. It provoked an ugly backlash against those who argued, fairly reasonably, that the law is oppressive (not to mention, hypocritical on many levels) against those with a different sexual orientation.
Those who wanted to keep the law said: "Hell no, we will not let
them impose
their way of life on the rest of us." Never mind the inherent misunderstanding and lack of logic behind this stance. The very fact that there are others who insist on foisting their definition of "normality" on them is evidence that their beliefs are
under attack.
And this is what I mean when I said that politics is the art of the possible: It's about realising that all ideals are based on emotion. It's about knowing that you will never be able make people give up their passionate beliefs with dispassionate logic; rather, you must be able to persuade others to
believe in you. It's about accepting that all men are flawed and that all change takes time. It's about coming to terms with the fact that, to get people to do something, you must give up something in return.
In short, it's about patient accommodation.
When you have some people stridently insisting that
they are right — on the basis of logic, science and natural history — and that anyone who disagrees with them are ignorant bigots, you have to wonder: Who is "pushing" who?
Hence, conflict.
Quote:
Originally Posted by warita
Personally, I am a pragmatic person myself, even though my previous post might have looked otherwise. However, I believe that idealism is a what makes a civilised society civilised.
|
Some 50 years ago, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his equally doughty colleagues fought tooth and nail against the Malay-dominated coalition ruling the Malayan Federation over the ideal of meritocracy against affirmative action favouring economically disadvantaged Malays. Mr Lee wouldn't compromise on the issue. For his stubbornness, Singapore got kicked out of the federation.
The die was cast. By right, we shouldn't have survived as an independent country. Big Brother expected us to crawl back and beg for mercy. Once again, politics is the art of the possible. Mr Lee couldn't say, "No, I can't do this." Having dragged us into this mess, he
had to find the "yes" that would work. He had to do whatever was necessary — including making decisions that later historians will no doubt see as highly questionable — to ensure we
would survive. The alternative would be to accept what was (and still is) a subtle form of apartheid.
Where did the idealism end and the pragmatism begin? Hard truths, hard choices.
@
DonQuigleone: I was in the midst of replying to your comments on Singapore's media landscape when my PC crashed (blue screen of death, MACHINE CHECK EXCEPTION). Nearly an hour's worth of work down the drain.
HHHNNNGGG. I managed to recover only the above, purely by memory. I'm too tired to continue. Maybe I'll pick it up later, if the one-who-must-not-be-named doesn't get me first.