Thursday, October 3, 2013

the irreconcilability of being cosmopolitan

Recently I had a discussion with my best friend about a job opportunity overseas, and whether he should take it up. It was an executive training programme, one that is bound to take him to far - both geographically and personally. However, he was held back because his partner will not be able to join him as a spouse, given how gay marriages/unions are not recognised in this business arrangement. Yet another older discussion about my friend's fiancé being sent to France for 2 years military training. She is a school teacher and is also bonded to complete her contract. As a result, she may not be able to join her husband overseas, and given the long time apart - as a newly wedded couple - the pain is unimaginable for most people.

Then, the discussions I have with aspiring undergraduates who are working their best in both academic and non-academic work, to be able to secure jobs that will allow them to have an overseas postings. The very archetypal of what our "gahmen" wants in an highly-educated cosmopolitan Singaporean. Yet these stories to me, present a very alarming contradiction.

There is an irreconcilable personal cost that comes with being a "cosmopolitan". That cost often befalls those of the middle-income group, people who do not have the means to travel back and forth often for work/personal reasons. Furthermore, the promise of a higher pay often is a painful offset to the things they are reminded to give up if they decide to take up the job. It might be romantic to see it this way, but this personal cost is not one that many people are willing to pay - especially those who have amorous or familial roots in a place. People are rendered immobile because they are either committed to their families, or partners, or simply, not having enough resources to move. Who are we stereotyping, when we say, we want more Singaporeans abroad? 

I find this argument very troubling, because it dehumanises the experience of the person. In reality, no one is really entirely mobile, no matter the skill level. There will always be a cost, and that cost is not captured in economic census, or business accounts. When we pay someone a high salary to move, to uproot those relations, we literally pay for them to give up their lives for the company/corporation. Isn't this just another form of modern slavery, albeit a slightly more glamorous version and comfortable version of the chains that bind us ever increasing to the developmentalist notion of "economic growth at all cost". I am perhaps simplifying the picture here, and there will always be successful cases of people who have it all. I don't have the figures of those cases, or in fact they are the minority. However, reading about the mixed reactions of Philippinoes who "succeeded" in Vancouver, their material successes came at too high a personal cost - they are not quite sure what they want anymore, and if giving up all that is worth the more comfortable life they are leading now.

While we may uproot ourselves to another country, and form new roots there, very much like how our new migrants have done in Singapore, it is often a long-drawn process that takes a lot of sacrifices. In Singapore, the notion of leaving home is never really as perforated as US or UK. In fact, we often have "duty" to family, and the notion of being responsible to one's family and loved ones is strong. Leaving behind our family completely is unthinkable in most cases. This complex cultural trait is what brings me to the next issue. Is that, if we want a strong Singaporean identity, and to make (and I quote a recent minister's statement) diversity work towards a common goal, is a task akin to finding a unicorn in the woods. If Singaporeans really do find no more roots here, and leave to never come back, there will be no common [national] goal to speak of, only a personal one. Ironically, being rooted here pushes our identity further, and what is made here - in place - is exceptionally important. Being cosmopolitan and being a Singaporean is a paradox.

It disturbs me to no end, that we aspire to be enslaved, and some even hungrily want it even - that they will do anything it takes to get that job. Just because it's a goal, doesn't mean it's a meaningful and admirable goal - slowly but surely…it chips away something in our hearts and minds, that we forget who we were before all of that. What are we really chasing? What should be one's priorities? What is the use of money, if you have no one to share it with, meaningfully?

No comments:

Post a Comment