Preetipls should be charged for inciting ethnic ill-will. Here’s why.
Dammit, I loved Preetipls. Her satirical style in commenting on social issues in Singapore were not only tasteful but incisive, delivering serious social introspection in a hilarious package. Much like the new breed of social commentators like John Oliver and Trevor Noah, I’d hoped that she would remain funny yet fair, irreverent yet insightful.
Her latest MV, “K. MUTHUSAMY” however, crossed a line.
For those of you who aren’t aware, the MV was a response to Singapore’s latest “brownface” scandal. Mediacorp (a government-linked corporation) recently released an ad for a mobile payment app featuring Chinese models doing “brownface”. Now, Mediacorp — and the creative agency they commissioned, Havas, claims that this was an attempt at racial representation. In a joint statement, both Mediacorp and Havas defended their actions saying: “The message behind this advertising campaign is that e-payment is for everyone. For that reason, Dennis Chew, well-known for his ability to portray multiple characters in a single production in a light-hearted way, was selected as the face of the campaign.”
Preetipls is absolutely right in calling out this lame-duck of an excuse. It would have been easy enough to hire actual models to represent their own races. There is no discernible, defensible reason for both Havas and Mediacorp to have engaged in such half-hearted attempts at racial representation. Mediacorp and Havas should not have done that in the same way that no one would have gotten a healthy actor to pretend to be intellectually disabled to “represent” a member of a social minority.
“You should have cast a Makcik, You should have called her” — Subhas
For this reason, both Mediacorp and Havas, should be taken to task — perhaps in the form of hefty fines, and mandatory community service imposed.
But Preetipls is not the knight in shining armor here. She doesn’t stop at merely calling out the behaviour of a select few “(racist) Chinese” — which is absolutely fair. But instead, in the music video she makes numerous allegations that there exists widespread systematic racial discrimination in Singapore.
Her co-star and brother, Subhas, raps this verse:
“…it’s actually accurate of the city we in, no matter who we choose, the Chinese man win”.
Wait, what? Are they actually alleging that there is a concerted effort by Singaporean Chinese at systematically disenfranchising entire non-Chinese segments of Singapore society? This goes beyond artistic license to the border of malicious intent.
Not only do we have a brown head of state that won in what many felt was a state-sponsored staged contest — but her popular contenders Mr Salleh Marican and Mr Farid Khan — are both brown-skinned. Additionally, market research consultancy Blackbox found that Tharman — also brown — was the top choice among Singaporeans to succeed the current Prime Minister. 69 per cent of almost 900 respondents surveyed indicated that they would support him for Prime Minister.
Subhas also goes on to lament that:
“We lost all our enclaves and our Holy days”
Okay, hold up. Firstly, all races were asked to axe one of their religious holidays in 1968. Secondly, are they seriously pining for the return of “ethnic enclaves”? Not only are enclaves symptomatic of systematic racial divides in places like Europe and the US, but also of — surprise, surprise — apartheid regimes. In case anyone needs a reminder, ethnic enclaves in Singapore plus disingenuous media outlets encouraged Singaporeans to slaughter each other — twice — once in 1964, and another time in 1969.
For all our varied attempts at state-led social engineering — one of the more successful ones that is envied around the world is the “Ethnic Integration Policy” of mandating that no one place of residence should have more than their proportionate share of their population represented in that housing estate. It is the prevention of ethnic enclaves that is a hallmark of a society not divided — literally — along the lines of race.
These aren’t passing remarks. They are serious allegations that have been made by radical leftists like Sangeetha Thanapal. But more than these cast serious doubts on the sincerity of her qualification of calling out only the “(racist) Chinese”. They are sweeping allegations aimed at an entire racial group. If that is not racist in itself, I don’t know what is.
Preetipls and her brother claim that Singapore’s voting is rigged in favor of ethnic Chinese, and valorize ethnic segregation. Neither of which are remotely funny, nor true. For that Preetipls — and her brother — should be charged with both sedition, and inciting ethnic ill-will.
