on Chinese Racism, the Idea of Success, and the poodle, Xiaxue

 

"In the posts in February 2018 and May 2020, Ms Khan had allegedly claimed that the authorities discriminated against citizens on the basis of race and religion. She publicly apologised for the remarks in the posts after the police reports were made. The WP stood by its candidate.

Re-posting Ms Khan’s posts on her Instagram story, Xiaxue branded her a “racist” and a “toxic woman”. She added that Ms Khan was trying to stir up civil strife by bringing  American-style politics to Singapore." - msnNews

So that's the story.

Well, it appears, as evidence suggests, that for quite a few Chinese, it isn't racism when the government does it.  

So when Lee Kuan Yew said Singapore would be better off without Malays and Indians; when PMs say that Singapore can only have non-chinese PMs when those Chinese whom are racist are alright with it; when they say that Singapore must always have a Chinese majority; along with a while load of other supremacist policies in the past, it isn't racism, and isn't supposed to stir up racial hatred?    

But when one says it is racist,  one is stiring up racial hatred?  So when one gets slapped, if he says 'ouch', he is stirring up hatred against the one who slapped him?  

Well, If they can call an abject and unabashed racist - Lee Kuan Yew - 'founding father', that is a validation that state racism against Indians and Malays is justified and Chinese racism isn't racism but just practical, and if Indians and Malays complain about it, they are being irrational and 'stirring up racial hatred'.  

That is the language of people who think they have some sort of natural ascendency over others, and others are just naturally inferior to them, and frequently on the basis of some success that is mistakenly attributed to the 'superior' race and deemed to be the only sort of 'success' humans should aspire to.  

For instance, insisting that economic success is the epitome of human achievement, and upon delivering it, using that as 'evidence' that the race that was 'preferred' was instrumental in delivering it.  Lee Kuan Yew said as much when he bemoaned singapore having Malays and Indians in it as obstacles to quick 'progress'.  And when relatively greater economic success was delivered, it was thus implied that it couldn't have been done without the chinese, and that it was good that singapore didn't have many malays and indians or it wouldn't have been delivered - a few chinese have said as much to me over the years as well, and also pointed to the economic succcess of Korea, China, and HK to validate their point.  They were completely  unawares of the fact that while the country, the government, and elite made much money, the people were thrust into greater and greater debt.  'Success', to them, obviously didn't mean increase in wealth and decrease in debt.  It just meant that means were available to make money to pay off greater debts that shouldn't have been there in the first place through flexible repayment plans and passing on the burden to children and grandchildren.  Quite a tragic comedy.  

Lee Kuan Yew, in his own words :

“I think we were progressing very nicely until the surge of Islam came. And if you asked me for my observations, the other communities have easier integration — friends, inter-marriages and so on — than Muslims ... I would say, today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”

In 1985, Mr Lee had said: “I have said this on many a previous occasion: that had the mix in Singapore been different, had it been 75% Indians, 15% Malays and the rest Chinese, it would not have worked.

“Because they believe in the politics of contention, of opposition. But because the culture was such that the populace sought a practical way out of their difficulties, therefore it has worked.”

In his 1998 book, The Man and His Ideas, Mr Lee echoed this sentiment. He said: “I have said openly that if we were 100 per cent Chinese, we would do better. But we are not and never will be, so we live with what we have.”

(And this isn't racist?  Typical of one who likes to do what he wants for his own gains, without opposition.  Hence, LKY 'preferred' the chinese whom he knew he could bend over the barrel and still be called a 'founding father'.  So, in that sense, LKY didn't look up to the chinese.  He just used their apathy and subservience to turn singapore into a corporate possession.) 

These are gross racial slurs against the more profound, humane, popularly democratic, and vibrant cultures of the Indians and Malays by the government for decades, and the chinese, naturally, were taught the association between indian/malay=riot/poverty, chinese=economic progress, and as expected, just ignored all difference - unlike the 70s and 80s when they paid attention to it and became smarter.  And this was further reinforced by even the so-called catholic archbishop praising and basically worshipping the late Kuan Yew, likening him to St Michael the archangel for putting down Malay demonstrations in the 60s, and delivering 'prosperity' and a green city.  Racism against the non-chinese, fascism, and eugenicism, were obviously palatable to him.  That basically disqualified him, not only as an Archbishop, but a Catholic and a human being.  

How does such insane reasoning of blaming the victim of racism for causing racial hatred for complaining about it work in these postcolonial times even.   Such arguments were one used against black slaves who fought for emancipation, those who resisted colonialism, and women who fought for equality.  And it is now being used against victims of racism?  If this sort of people ruled the US, we wouldn't hear about the BLM movement unless it is in the context of all of them being rounded up in thrown into 're-education' camps, with black=troublemakers/rioters, and conveniently ignoring the gross racism that led the to demonstrate in the first place!  

People should fuss about the above instead of going after some poodle-brained bimbo for taking an approach the government has been taking openly for decades with the apathy of the chinese.  It is the aforementioned that serves as the breeding kennel from whence poodles like Xiaxue stick their snouts through, surveying the world with shallow intent.

All my life, whenever i talk about racism against the Indians and Malays, just about most of the Chinese i spoke to, even friends, deny it happens.  How would they know?  To tell a disadvantaged sector that they are not being disadvantaged is a claim to know more than them about what they go through, and that their views aren't important.  That itself is racist.   And Singapore is full of it ever since that knuckledragger Lee institutionalised racism and claimed the country for one sector and demonised the rest, and imposed an singapore brand of apartheid where the non-chinese were forcibly dispersed throughout the country whilst ensuring that the chinese were a majority everywhere.  It cannot be said to be purposed for racial harmony if in the same breath, one says that they should always be a minority.  That can be construed as nothing other than assimilationist.  

Racial harmony is premised on the equal worth of all races, and an appreciation of their difference of significant and differing worth that can contribute to the maximal development of all, regardless of race.

Racial harmony is premised on the equal worth of all races, and an appreciation of their difference of significant and differing worth that can contribute to the maximal development of all, regardless of race.  To say that everyone is off equal worth, and should get along is good.  To say that not all races are off equal worth and demand they get along, whilst dispersing one sector, is an effort as subjugation and assimilation.  An ethnic colonisation, so to speak, like what is taking place in Tibet.  That is what makes the housing policy of dispersing the Malays and Indians racist.  That is treason itself, or postcolonial colonialism.  So one should not be surprised when the likes of this bimbo say what she says.  She is a logical corollary of overarching, normalised, systemic racism. In other words, Xiaxue is nothing but a post-digestive fart arising from indigestion emerging from an unbalanced sinocentric diet.  One should just focus on correcting the dietary imbalance in order to dispel the gaseous emission, and then true organic harmony, or 'wellness' if you like, can ensue.

Anyone accusing a person who complains about racism of stirring up racial hatred are implying that they are inferior and that their marginalisation is just commonsense.  The implication is that they therefore have no reason to bring it up other than it being of malicious intent.  Hence, if one was to complain about racism against the Malays and Indians, and the complainant is investigated, it is a stern warning against complaining about it, and a demand that i get used to it, underdevelop accordingly, and then naturally become blind to it.   Black slaves, women, and the colonised were once similarly dismissed and further victimised as it was thought that their lower status was natural given the perception that they were inferior.  

Governments should prove that they aren't racist, and do much about getting rid of racism, NOT, silence those who demand proof that they aren't racist.  The latter itself is proof that the government is racist as it dismisses their calls as not worth attention, which is what racist governments do in the face of races they marginalise, or think aren't worth equal respect. 


As for this idiotic Xiaxue saying that Khan is stirring up racial hatred, well, the next time her make-up artist screws up drawing her eyebrows, she shouldn't complain or risk being accused of stirring up hatred against make-up artists.  Idiot.  And secondly, what does she mean by accusing Khan of bringing in 'american style politics'?  What does that mean?  That the interests of those whom aren't a majority shouldn't be of any concern?  Or that the majority are the best judges of whether minorities suffer discrimination?  Or that racism in singapore isn't racism because the government says so despite all the evidence to the contrary?  That people should just get used to their varying status in society and just smile like morons and 'get along' for the sake of 'harmony'?  What 'style' of politics is that?  Well, as evidence suggests, it is a 'China' style of politics.  And as commonsense suggests, when you just leave evils as they are, do you best to get around it, that is an animal-style politics, because it is only animals that do not question the environment, do not make efforts to bring about equality, and just do their best despite it all.  

Xiaxue is nothing but a post-digestive fart arising from indigestion emerging from an unbalanced sinocentric diet.  One should just focus on correcting the dietary imbalance in order to dispel the gaseous emission, and then true organic harmony can ensue.

People like this Xiaxue are guilty of fragmenting nations, inciting racial hatred, and furthering racism, as they refuse to listen to the complaints of the marginalised, and insist that if they want to complain, they be thrown into prison for inciting racial hatred by complaining about racism.  That can only either deliver resignation and underdevelopment on the part of the marginalised, or, hatred.  That is a logical consequence of racism, not a 'lifestyle choice'.  

And all these complaints about why Khan was threatened by the police into silence about her questions on racism, and why Xiaxue isn't is counterproductive.  What are people saying?  That since Khan was silenced, Xiaxue should be silenced too?  That just leaves the racism that Khan inquired after unaddressed doesn't it.  No.  Don't forget, the laws that can be used to silence the privileged can also be used to silence the disadvantaged, and in that, the losses suffered by the disadvantaged will be perpetuated.  No.  Any comments on race needs to be questioned after, discussed, debated, and incite critical introspection for the purpose of engendering greater understanding, appreciation, and harmony based on equal respect for all.  So Xiaxue's nonsense should be listened to, debated, and with empathy and harmony in mind as the ultimate goal.
  

Finally, The fact that an utter idiot and racist like this Xiaxue can be a 'social influencer' says much about the decrepit state of the state.   Let's put it another way, it takes a nation where a racist, eugenist, fascist like Lee Kuan Yew can be revered as a 'founding father' to produce people who would confuse a cretinous pimple like Xiexue as a social influencer, as opposed to someone requiring psychiatric aid.

Here's a simple commonsense fact.  If you don't stand up for people whom are marginalised, and even thrive on the system that is brought about as a result, they aren't going to like you.  That is not a matter of choice, but a matter of consequence following on from basic commonsense and self-respect.  

I'm not for a Chinese brand of harmony that has historically been based on getting along despite inequality in China.  I'm for a harmony that is based on the eradication of inequality, not the eradication of empathy and self-respect so that we don't notice inequality.  I'll stand up for the Chinese any day if they were to be marginalised in any way anywhere, but it HAS to be reciprocal.  If not, that makes one a self-absorbed yokel, as opposed to a cherished local.  The idea of citizenship requires cross-sector empathy, not demands that everyone gets along despite cross-sector discrimination and apathy.  When one begins to demonise those who point out inequality, it is incontrovertible proof that one is attempting to reinforce and perpetuate inequality, albeit unwitting.  And THAT is what incites hatred between sectors.  To disagree with that is akin to insisting that acknowledging that a house is on fire and calling the fire department is the reason why the fire existed.  That is stupidity of the highest order.  

#BlackLivesMatter 

related article: What is the Black Lives Matter Movement in Essence?

edX