Well, 1995 has come and gone. On the whole, it has been a good year for SInterCom. The Singapore Internet Community has grown enthusiastically along with everthing associated with the Internet. The content in the sites has improved, and participation has been good. However, instead of looking back at 1995, I would prefer to look forward to 1996, and beyond.
These are 'interesting times' for SinterCom, and I am not sure - yet - if it will prove to be a blessing or a curse. From a loose affliation of students and Webpages around the world, SInterCom is evolving into something more. The community has become more cohesive? There are ambitious plans for a server based in Singapore, a book, irc, among other ideas associated with SInterCom. As with all new adventures, the road ahead is uncertain.
Will the voluntarily nature of SInterCom remain? Will new volunteers continue to come forward? There is no guarantee that those of us presently associated with SInterCom can continue to maintain our present level of commitment - those of us in University (me for example) will graduate (hopefully) and eventually be caught up in the demands of a new job, chasing promotions in an work environment that is probably more demanding. Those already working may find themselves in new situations - will Wyn, for example, have as much time for SInterCom when her third child is born?
Will SInterCom retain its independence? Already we are sponsored by commercial interests - will such sponsorships increase as we become more popular - will government interests sponsor us as a "second track" for the dissemination of information - do we accept such sponsorships? Certainly we would not be the first independent voluntarily 'organisation' to do so - but will it compromise our independence or perceptions of our independence - do we really want to be independent or be perceived as independent anyway?
Will the focus of SInterCom remain unchanged? Thus far, we are an archive (and facilitator) of discussions on Singapore, Singlish, and the like. Our main objective is to 'collect' thoughts and sentiments on Singapore. However, the potential for emphasis on other 'interests' is enormous. An expansion of Chong Kee's job's page with links to the personnel manager of every major company in Singapore could make us a 'switch-board' for emploment, the growth of net-worked games could see us becoming 'league-organizers' for Civilisation, Command and Conquer, Doom, and others. IRC might even turn us into a 'dating facilitator' of sorts.
In my opinion, change will always be inevitable. It is my hope however, that the change, when it occurs reflects a process of renewal, brought about by new editors with new, perhaps different interests, but built upon the foundations of the 'old' instead of tearing them down.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,
committed citizens can change the world;
indeed, it's the only thing that ever does."
- Margaret Mead
December is a time associated with images of Christmas in many countries. Love. peace, generosity and the spirit of Christmas usually comes to mind of many, but this Christmas, Singaporeans stands out from the rest - again - by resurrecting another traditional image of Christmas - Scrooge. Santa was 'mugged' and Singaporeans (presumable rich) ventured forth in their Mercedez Benz to seize free textbooks intended for the needy. It is a timely reminder, as one reporter puts it, of the difference between attaining material wealth and aquiring social graces.
There are 'good' people in Singapore - generous, hardworking, honest, intelligent, tolerant, and kind. Unfortunately, they have yet to project themselves more visably - perhaps they are modest as well - and hence, our image abroad suffers. There are also 'bad' people in Singapore. As with all modern societies, we do have our cold-blooded killers, rapists, hooligans, racists and drug dealers - fortunately, they are relatively rare and most Singaporeans reject and are repulsed by such behaviour.
What Singapore has in abundance are people who - sadly - are aptly described as 'ugly'. They are hardworking, and do have kind and generous impulses on occasion, but are often loud in seeking acknowledgement for what they do, or just loud. They are anxious to improve themselves through education and travel, but often come across as snobbish, 'pushy' or badly behaved. They can live happily in the midst of a diversity of cultures but express themselves untactfully on 'foreign' cultures. They appear proud, to the point of arrogance, of our national accomplishments, but still tend to complain incessantly whenever possible, whereever possible, about the state of affairs in Singapore. They are the salt of the earth, rough and ready, and have 'too much money' even though they complain about having too little.
At this point in our history, when the more pressing issues of political and economic survival have been addressed, Singaporeans from the PM to Ah Seng from the kopi-tiam have begun to turn their attention to the 'image' of Singaporeans. It is generally acknowledged that fine clothes can not in themselves transform Eliza Dolittle into a Duchess - Not when she exposes her plebeian origins the moment she speaks. Therefore, Singaporeans must either look good but keep still and quiet, or start looking for our own Henry Higgins to teach us the social graces we lack. But is it too late? Afterall, 'manners' and attitudes are aquired from an early age - and the present generation of new parents were bred with the instincts of modern 'economic barbarians' to plunder a 'pampered West' of their riches.
Editor: Edmund Chia
Return to Editorial