Environment

Eco-tourism
With the rise of income and affluence of people, tourism is the ‘IN’ thing and for many global citizens, traveling and venturing out of their country is adventurous and enriching. However, this is only the rosy picture depicted out of the tourism industry, while many countries try to sell their country to the foreigners as a tourism ‘hot spot’, they are in actuality, doing much damage to their land and environment.

Many developing countries, namely Costa Rica, Ecuador, Nepal, Kenya, Madagascar, and Antarctica, try to promote themselves as an ecotourism spot to impress and attract the city dwellers to visit their country and thereby increase their revenue through the big bucks spent by the tourists. Yet, through the promotion of ecotourism, where the countries try to preserve their nature and habitat the way they are, they are actually doing harm to their environment. For example, there is a deforestation process to make land to build expressway for the cars to reach the destination where they can enjoy the scenery and beauty of nature. This process has inevitably taken place because there bound to be sacrifices made when one country develop itself, to link up the people to mature, but while doing so, those self proclaiming ecologically conscious tourists had actually prompted nature to be destroyed to make land for their interest. So, in what position are they ecologically conscious?
Another environmental degradation by the eco-tourists would be the footprints they left behind, as harmless as it may sound, it has indeed a large scale impact when thousands or even tens of thousands of tourists embark on the same route to venture into the nature, in the Annapurna Circuit of Nepal, the eco-tourists caused soil erosion and done much damage to the plants in the area with constant trampling of the ground. Though this was never their intention, harm was still done.

In my perspective, the cost of eco-tourism is too much for the locals of the developing countries to carry, one reason would be that even with the higher income through selling of the souvenirs and handicrafts, but their beautiful homeland has no doubt been infiltrated with tourists, people who are better-off, who wants to see a different part of the world, and it becomes a form of client-patron relationship where the locals would try as much as they can to show and provide with what the tourists want, and this is not just a degradation of their environment, it is also a leak of their heritage. I would say so because what the tourists want to see might not necessary be what the locals truly are.
Also, I believe that as ironic as the initial aims of nature preservation may be, it is actually doing much more harm than good for the environment. Some of the resources are non-renewable, meaning that once depleted, it will not be of existence anymore, so the process of clearing of forest to make the nature habitats accessible for the eco-tourists might have actually led to the depletion of the non-renewable resources.

Imagine the back packer who treks on a mountain has to carry 4 to 5 kilograms of wood as a source heat to cook and stay warm through the night, so if there are 10 backpackers, 50 kilograms of wood would have to be consumed everyday. This may be an adventure for the city dwellers, but for the locals, it is their land, which is being tapped on and damaged.  Not to mention the living organisms in the area, who has to flee and hide because of the sudden increase in population in their habitat.

Eco-tourism is no doubt an enriching for the young ones, who have been living in cities all their lives, but what will happen to the habitat when they are destroyed and damaged, these are the only few left and environmental harm had been done, should we stop pro-claiming ourselves as the educated eco-tourists and let the locals have some peace?

Technology and Globalization

Digital camera and privacy issue

We all know of the rapid development of technology, which is directly linked to globalization. To me, one aspect of technology has left me in awe. It is the development of digital camera from traditional camera. Though the two has seemingly similar function, however, in my perspective, they are worlds apart.
A traditional camera works on film, so each click on the camera will deplete the film, this brought about the cautious attitude when taking photo, where one will aim and perhaps ask whoever or whatever that is supposed to be in the photo to standby and get ready.

A digital camera runs on memory stick, and there is this very unique function where the user can delete the undesirable photos as he deemed and this allows the user to take as many photos as he likes. Since no film will be depleted, the user has no worry when he takes countless photos. Another feature of the digital camera would be the wire that connects his camera to the computer. By doing so, he can ‘upload’ his photos to his computer and share his photos with his friends by loading them on websites.

What has this got to do with Sociology then? I thought, there is a change in the attitude of the user of camera and this therefore resulted in the change in usage of camera. Previously, generally people only bring their cameras out when there are special occasions, but now, cameras are usually in their bag almost all the time. So, whenever they like they can dish out their camera and start shooting any photos. For example, when an accident happened, there is a higher chance that the people around take down evidence (photos) of the scene even before the police arrive, compare to that previously.

Also, citizen journalism is boosted this way. I went to STOMP (Straits Times Online Mobile Print) website and clicked on ‘Singapore Seen’, there are numerous photos taken by the people of the behavior of fellow Singaporeans and uploaded to the website for others to criticize and condemn. One of which has the headline of ‘Selfish guys hog seats in crowded food court’ reported by STOMPer TKK (they even have a name of STOMPer) who goes on and on to relate how disgusted he was by the behavior of the ‘selfish guys’. I believe that previously when everyone is carrying traditional cameras, this would not be likely to happen because everyone tend to have a ‘mind your own business’ attitude and not want to ‘waste’ their films on such photos. But, in contrast, the users now can delete away any photos easily so they do not have to worry when they shoot any photos. Thus, the rise of such platforms like STOMP for the people to ‘share’ their photos.

It is both the introduction of digital camera and Internet that allows the growth of such acts. The people now have to be more cautious of their actions because you will never know who is clicking their camera, capturing your ‘unglamorous’ moment and uploaded it to the Internet.

The ‘Edison scandal’ was also another result of the development of digital camera and Internet. He uploaded his ‘scandalous’ photos to his computer, and when it broke down, sent it for repair. Yet, little did he know this consequently resulted in the spread of his photos when the guys over at the repair centre send his photos elsewhere. The two examples prompt the people to be careful and discreet about their behavior, be it inside (Edison scandal – photos taken at home) or outside (STOMP), there is little privacy now. Some may argue that cameras had the same function previously too, but I choose to think that when films will deplete with every click, the people will not have the ‘take first then decide’ attitude, so photos in STOMP will not be around.

This makes me conclude that the rise in technology can bring about less private space for people, even if you are at home – the place where you think belongs entirely to you, you will never know who is watching, especially with the 10x or 20x zooming function of upcoming cameras.

Health and Population Week 10

AIDS in Africa

Let me start of with a startling fact of Africa, 30.6 million people in our world are infected with the HIV virus, which readily makes them the AIDS patients. Perhaps, this is not startling enough, because of media, we have been taught and have learned of this fact quite often in our lives. Here comes the question, if it is so well-known, what is the reason why AIDS is still wide spreading and not being controlled? In the case of SARS, a new virus that attacked us in 2002, the situation has already been under controlled. Why then, the HIV virus that has been in the context for decades still prevails?

Nearly 12 million people have died of AIDS since the start of this epidemic, and out of the 30.6 million HIV carriers, 20.6 million are Africans. The seriousness of the situation can be illustrated by the fact that even some of the monkeys and chimpanzees of Africa are infected with the HIV virus.

My view on this is that culture is the most important determinant to which HIV virus is transmitted so rapidly in Africa. Culture not just aid in transmission of AIDS, it also prevented the people from seeking the right treatment, which impeded the medical treatment they could have been offered.

The cultural behavior of the Africans, I would say, is important in transmitting AIDS because “sex is no longer perceived as merely a biological fact, but rather a culturally informed experience, shaped by the inner world and the material world in which humans live (Davis and Whitten, 1987). When the culture makes it a social norm for men and women to have multiple partners, there is no doubt or queries to why it has to be this way, no one simply question the establish culture. This would ensure a breeding ground for AIDS, if no one questions promiscuous behaviors. In a survey done in Kenya, men in Kenya has an average of 9.3 sexual partners. This definitely increases the risk of the Kenya men in contacting the HIV virus. However, it is said that women are of higher risk in contacting HIV virus, strangely, the number of sexual partners of Kenya women is only 1.3, which is very low, so the underlying reason is that women in Africa are subordinates to men, so when the men behaves loosely outside, he will bring back the virus to his wife and the wife will then pass it on to their child. By then, the entire family will be infected with the HIV virus. The culture permits men to perform such acts, and the gender expectation of a woman in that particular culture can only adhere to unquestioning faithfulness to the husband.

Earlier I mentioned the culture that prevented the Africans from seeking the right treatment as a reason for the widespread of AIDS in their country. This culture can be seen as the denial in seeking proper treatment, the culture that ensures that they seek witchcraft and believe strongly in fate. The Africans accounted the HIV virus to ‘aggrieved ancestors, wicked witches or as a retribution for sinfulness’ (Okigbo, Hall and Zielger, 2002)). They believed that there must be a supernatural reason for their ill fatedness, instead of accounting it to their sexual behavior.

Because of their culture, they were denied of proper treatment, which probably could reduce their agony and prolong their life. Also, without acknowledging the source of the problem, it was impossible for the Africans to control the spread of the disease. They would not recognize the root cause of the problem. Fortunately, with the severe spread of AIDS, they were brought to recognize the problem and not be in denial.

For Africa, it is harder to contain the spread of HIV virus mainly because of the culture that prevails. The culture is something that is very hard for outsiders to understand, and also hard for outsiders to intervene and teach them. There is no right or wrong, yet if the problem is so serious, shouldn’t it be obvious that that is not exactly desirable for the society, with sufferings from the children and women who have no knowledge of why they are ill, and the extreme low mortality rate?

Reference:
Gilbert Herdt and Andrew M. Boxer.  The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, Anthropology, Sexuality and AIDS (May,
1991), Ethnographic Issues in the Study of AIDS, pp. 171-187

David J. Hunter. Epidemiology, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Jan., 1993), AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Epidemiology of Heterosexual Transmission and the Prospects for Prevention, pp. 63-72

M. Kent Jennings and Ellen Ann Andersen. Political Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Jun., 2003), The Importance of Social and Political Context: The Case of AIDS Activism, pp. 177-199

Charles Okigbo, Carol A. Okigbo, William B. Hall Jr., Dhyana Ziegler. Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 32, No. 6 (Jul., 2002), The HIV/AIDS Epidemic in African American Communities: Lessons from UNAIDS and Africa pp. 615-653

Richard G. Parker, Gilbert Herdt, Manuel Carballo. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Feb., 1991), Sexual Culture, HIV Transmission, and AIDS Research, pp. 77-98

Urbanization Week 9

Poverty Singapore
Look at all these people lying around
Look at all these people being scraped right off the ground
Because of too many broken homes
Too many cardboard boxes
Too many people who just can’t survive
Hard losses well Americans don’t belong in tins
Let’s learn to help ourselves before we help the foreign
Wounded decay shout out dismay
Can you hear their voices yelling out mayday?
Why are we sending money over seas?
Look out your window our nation’s the one that needs
Because there’s not enough income
There’s too much poverty
Why must we lose more lives before our eyes will see?
We’ll leave it alone hope it goes away
It’s hard to ignore life when you live it everyday
I’d like to see I’d like to say I’d like to hear that help is on the way
Here today where tomorrow?
Death in the shadows
Affects us all
Too many bodies lie in the street
Too many hungry mouths that have the right to feed

Are there poor in Singapore?
After viewing the video on Youtube, I was on my adventure to search for the poor in my neighbour, so I brought along my camera, to snap photos of beggars, tissue seller, etc. It was not as tough as I thought to find them, just at the MRT station opposite my residence; I managed to capture two of such. The first old man was a tissue seller, he’s been there since the start of this year, and that spot has already become his territory. It was only recently that I see a portable chair there for him, in the past, he just squat at the corner and stretch out his hand to sell his tissue. Imagine an old man squatting for such long hours, usually, I would see him as early as 7.30am in the morning while I’m on my way to school, and at 8pm, he would still be on the same spot, with his hand stretched. Note the plasters on his right leg, it’s just an assumption on my part but that might be a result of prolong hours of standing. If he is not poor, then why is he doing this? For leisure? You think so?

The second photo I took was of a man who plays the electrical guitar. Who he is, what he does, I have no idea, the thing is that he seem rather well-groomed, with a bandana, track shoes, checked shirt and jeans. Is he poor? Well, I can’t really tell, he’s new to the territory, perhaps just a month or so.

The third picture was taken on the bridge linking Habour Front MRT station to the Habour Front Centre. This is clearly an aged lady who has many big red plastic bags around her. I went to take a closer look; there are tissue papers and some small accessories in the plastic bags, which she’s selling. She is evidently senior and seems rather dirty. So, is she not poor?

It really was not tough to find these people on the streets, on the streets where people rush, for work, for school, for home. Most just leave them alone, the reason- there are too many to give money to. However, MM Lee took pride in Singapore, he claimed that, “You go down New York, Broadway. You will see the beggars, people of the streets. Where are the beggars in Singapore? Show me. I take pride in that.” (2007)
I just managed to prove him wrong, so easily. They might not be beggars, but they are on the streets, just waiting for people to pity and sympathize with them, offering just a tiny bit of their money. We know how the statistics never fail to show the economic growth in Singapore, how “residents households in Singapore enjoyed good, steady growth in income from work between 1990 and 2000. The average household income increased from $3080 to $4940 at an average annual rate of 4.9 percent.” (Singapore Census of Population, 2000) and “Households earning at least $5000 had increased from 16 percent to 35 percent of the population. Households with $10000 or more showed the largest increase from 2.8 percent to 10 percent.” (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, 2002). With urbanization, Singapore economy no doubt has been doing well but like what Durkheim advocates of division of labour, there bound to be division of labour in the economy, especially with modern urbanization, skills get obsolete even faster, those who cannot catch up will suffer. With division of labour, there will be those in the white collar, and so, there will be people in the blue collar too. While creating those who are rich, our society is very prone to nurturing people who are poor too. It is definitely a boast on MM Lee’s part to claim that there’s no poor in Singapore. Yes, it is true we do not have slums and squatters in Singapore, but where we find these people are in the void deck, in the park, outside the malls.

Then, there comes the question of how urbanization creates the poor in Singapore? It has been observed that the visible poor on the streets are commonly the aged. These are the people, who have no energy, no resource to catch up in the rat race, urbanization means quickening of the pace of life, efficiency being the priority to earn the largest profit, where do these aged slow moving people fit in then? Of course, there are occupations like toilet cleaners, dishwashers, plate collectors for them, however, there is also competition for these lowly paid jobs. What about those who are incapable to work? Who are to support them? The government encourages the younger generation to support the aged. This is what I rip from my Social Studies textbook, “while the government is providing help for those in need, it also believes that Singaporeans should be responsible for their own future. First, children should have the moral responsibility to care for their parents. Members of the community should also respect and show care for its senior citizens”

Urbanization has brought Singapore to the fifth in the world for income per capita, one of the highest in the world; yet, we should not neglect the however small proportion of the population who are suffering from poverty. Doesn’t this call for action? Especially when we know ours is an ageing population, are we just going to let to go on? And be oblivious to what is apparent to us and our eyes, take note of the tissue sellers when you’re out next time. They are everywhere. This is the most significant effect of globalization on our population, while most are moving with the flow of urbanization, they are stagnant.

Reference:
1)    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-guxHFyz2A&feature=related
2)    Income distribution and inequality measures in Singapore, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, 2002, Hong Kong SAR
3)    Singapore Census of Population, 2000 Advance Data Release No. 7

Identity – Week 8

Our socially constructed identity.(Wong Xing Wuan)

From one look, we can differentiate rather easily, if one is a foreigner or a Singaporean, a Chinese Singaporean or an Indian Singaporean. However, what is that that help us differentiate different people? It’s our identity as a person, as a community, that give rise to casting a general idea for others to identify us as a Singaporean, or a foreigner. The question is, what exactly is our identity? What differentiate us from others? And, perhaps, who gave us this identity?

In my perspective, how I differentiate a Singaporean and a foreigner is through the accent. Our special accent of Singlish (a mixture of English, Mandarin, Malay, Tamil and Hokkien) will get my head turn, identifying, “Hey, that’s my fellow Singaporean!” Yet, we all know of the different speaking proper language campaigns in Singapore, recently “Speak Good English” being the most prominent. For me, it is the active participation of authorities in our daily lives, to mould our identity, our behaviour, to the one that is deemed best for us. They can go on and on about the “We know it best, despite the unpopularity” issue, yet, that is not sufficient. In my standpoint, it is definitely not sufficient to debunk whatever the government has to say because everyone else is doing so.

The fundamental cause for my disgruntment is the pro-active movements to eradicate the Singaporean identity we have shaped through time. It is not right to say that when you have a bilingual policy and a multi racial society, you will have a good mix for every different culture to have a fusion? It is definitely true that we should speak in a manner that others would be able to comprehend us, however, it is not too much to ask for to let the culture of Singapore and our identity as Singaporeans stay. It is through the daily interaction with our Malay, Chinese and Indian neighbours (a result of the shuffling different race groups in one block) no doubt is the root of our Singlish, you speak English, while replacing some of the terms with your Mother Tongue when you cannot find a better term in English, our neighbours picking up a little of what you’ve just said and integrating it into English, giving rise to our one and only unique flavour of Singlish. Note my choice of word, I am using “unique” to describe Singlish, not “weird” as of what authority would advocate.

In my perspective, it is unusual how our government wants to mould our identity, and not let it shape on its own. This is the reason why there are terms of a “socially constructed” Singapore identity. It is not true that we have no identity thus we have to rely on authorities to bestow us with one, from what I’m experiencing, it is the refusal to the natural identity we create as Singaporeans and replacing it with a “better” identity that suit us better, however, it is debatable what exactly is suitable for us. I always believe that the one that is developed over time, shaped by the people is better than the one that is deemed better for us. We are educated, with literacy rate of a high 93%, it is time to let us dictate our lives instead? Speaking Singlish is a culture, it is our identity la.
Reference:
1. Singapore Census of Population, 2000 Advance Date Release No.3 Literacy and Language

Democracy Week 7

The Forgotten War

The history of South Korea dates back to the 1950s, where Korean War erupted. It was a war of ideology, which left North Korea a communist state and South Korea democratic. In this war, the two superpowers rendered their support for the respective states and widen the deep-seated segregation of the two. The details of the war shall not be the main focus of this essay, but rather, I would like to seek the answer to for US’s motive in intervening in the Korean War.

US has always been the “big brother” of democracy, this is evident in USA involvement in various struggle of democracy like the Vietnam War and in Cuba. It is justified by claiming to aid establish a democratic state in such states. But in the case of South Korea, was democracy a mere excuse for military intervention by US? First, I would like to highlight that North Korea almost became democratic when UN General Assembly passed the resolution to establish a “united, independent and democratic government” on 7 October 1950 after crossing the 38th parallel, it was the involvement of China that impeded US’s expansionist policy.

Since the initial reason for US to be involved in the Korean War was twisted, it would be likely that US had a change in stance in the midst of the war, from helping South Korea defend against North Korea’s invasion to expanding the ideology of democracy to North Korea. This would verify that US intervention in the Korean War was not purely to aid South Korea to attain democracy.

Another point to take note of would be that the leader of South Korea, Syngman Rhee was actually authoritarian and anti-communist. So, naturally Rhee would want to set up an authoritative state in the South Korea, yet it is the intervention of US that changed the initial decision of Rhee. So, it is fair to say that US was there to spread their ideology of democracy? US intervened in the Korean War on behalf on United Nations (UN). As the superpower, it is understandable why US would take things in their hands. Yet in my standpoint, US’s intervention in the Korean War is to spread their ideology, not purely to contain communism. Since democracy would embrace freedom of choice, it is such contradiction when the legacy of the Korean War was democracy in South Korea rather than the initial authoritative state that Rhee wanted to set up. Of course we should not disclaim how success South Korea is now in terms of economic development in comparison to North Korea, yet the motive of US is still being questioned. Democracy in South Korea became by default after US took charge in the Korean War for the South Koreans, was it yet another expansionist plan by US?

The Korean War is just another case study that explicitly demonstrates how nationalist movement turn into war. Many at times, this is a route that many nations would take upon before they successfully become a state. In my perspective, bigger countries like the US take advantaged of this opportunity to spread their ideology and force it upon the nations. Thus, I believe that this might not necessarily be that the nations desire, but the pressurizing force by the larger states made it inevitable that these nations form democratic states.

War – Week 6

Indian-Pakistani Conflict (Wong Xing Wuan)

On 26 October 1947, the Instrument of Accession was signed. Jammu and Kashmir, among other princely states, were given to Indian officially. This is the start of the conflict between India and Pakistan, which to date is still a source of concern for the war.

Indian and Pakistan both have their claims on Kashmir, I would concentrate on Pakistan’s view on the issue. Pakistan’s claim on the Kashmir conflict is that Kashmir being Muslim-dominated should be acceded to Pakistan (Islamic State). India being a secular state is accused of marginalizing the Muslims of Kashmir. I would like to explore if religion is a valid reason for Pakistan to endlessly fight over Kashmir with India.

Pakistan pointed out how India suppressed the minorities in Assam by mass killing of the Sikhs. It was said that some of the government in India are right-wing Hindus who deployed violent tactics in dealing with minorities’ problem. However, would it really be better if the Muslims of Kashmir were part of Pakistan? In my standpoint, it is not necessarily true; similarly, it would not be fair to claim that a secular state cannot do a good job in assimilating the minorities into their society.

In my perspective, it is important for a society to settle in a place where there is a common identity for all, sharing similar bond. However, in most cases, a nation might not necessary mean a society. This can be understood as a country having one or more societies, because the territorial lines that are drawn do not necessarily bound societies. Thus, Kashmir being a Muslim dominated society should not be a valid reason for Pakistan to take over Kashmir. It is understandable that Pakistan would desire for Kashmir to be part of Pakistan, nevertheless, is it purely due to wanting the Muslims of Kashmir to unite with their Islamic country? I do not think so, mainly because I view this as a guise for their political agenda of securing Pakistani’s strategic and military interest.

The India-Pakistani conflict originated with reasons to protect the interest of the people in Kashmir, yet, time and again, the refusal on both parties to ceasefire remains a huge source of social problem for the Kashmiris. Since 1947, there has been no end to the conflict, terrorists groups like All Parties Hurriyat Conference, Lashkar-e-Toiba and Hizbul Mujahideen bring the conflict to new heights. The intervention of these terrorists groups results in a bigger conflict. The people of Kashmir have to live with the threats of these terrorists groups.  One can understand the plight of the people. Pakistan was involved in the Kashmir conflict was because to safeguard the interest of the Muslims in Kashmir, yet, this is not evident in the consequent development of the India-Pakistani conflict. In my perspective, the reason why Pakistan is fighting so rigorously to put Kashmir back onto their map is not pure religious reason. There is definitely much more to the story.

This can be a case study for the other wars in the world. As much as we try to simplify the causes of different war, there is a high tendency for more complex reasons why different wars take place. It can easily assumed that one party must be at fault while the other party goes scot free, yet I believe that the social relations take a huge role in why wars broke out. The breaking down of social ties between different parties also results in unresolved wars and miscommunication prolongs the war. In the process of the war, the social gap between the countries will grow wider that will not do any good to resoling the war. Perhaps, ultimately exhaustion of either party would put the war to an end.

Crime and globalization – Week 5

Why do people commit crime when they know it is wrong? (Wong Xing Wuan)

It is a common knowledge that committing any form of crime is illegal and may result in punishment, especially heavy punishments in Singapore, so why do people still commit crime? This is something that I find it very hard to understand, however I will try to seek the closest answer to this.

Criminal acts can range from the minor pick pocketing to the major murder. Regardless whether they are minor or major crimes, they are still as illegal. In a society that is exposed to globalization and economic growth, why is there a global increase in crime rates? Alongside is the increase in literacy rate where most people have access to education; this puzzles me, would this not be a cause for lower crime rate with higher education rate? All these factors would seemingly be the push for lower crime rate with higher awareness, however, I would like to argue that these actually explains the growing crime rates.

Firstly, in my perspective, people do not choose to engage in criminal acts, it is the social factors that lead them to the path they take. While there is education for all, the system of meritocracy would result in elitism. This will create different classes in the society. Classes can be of positive impact to the society if every class in the society adheres to its role and contribute to the society positively, yet in most cases where inequality is prominent, it will lead to social dislocation of those who are of lower class, which are usually those with lower education. They will experience difficulty in securing opportunities in the society as the opportunities are usually provided for the better educated. The social dislocation will be a major push for these people to resort to criminal acts. They do not have the normal means to gain recognition in the society, thus they had to find alterative to survive in the ever-growing society. Therefore, resorting to crime. Social dislocation has a very serious impact on these people who are often looked down upon and ostracized by the community. They would be easily bought over if any group embraces them that also explain the higher rate of group crime than individual crime. In a society, people tend to have a sense of belonging to their own community, so when these people find themselves being accepted into the group, they will naturally want to prove themselves worthy, and thus explains the typical reason of “I wanted to prove myself and prove that I’m a true man.”

Another reason I think that may propel people into crime is unemployment. Globalization has indeed created many job opportunities, however globalization also meant that skills get obsolete faster. To get on stage, people need to acquire their skills and upgrade them faster, those who are unable to catch up would face the problem of retrenchment. In today’s society, the firms are highly competitive and usually engage in cost efficient production methods to cut costs, thus the employees who are not as efficient would face very real unemployment issues. I would argue that unemployment is a push for higher crime rate as the society expects nothing less from everyone. The social expectation will result in the low self-esteem of those who are unable to grow with the flow; they would be labeled as unworthy and useless by the society. Similar to those with low education, it is not their own will to commit crime, it is the structure of the society and the way the society functions that result in the lack of opportunities for this group of people.

We might think that Singapore is a lawful and orderly society, with minimal crime rate, thus this might not be applicable in Singapore context, however in my standpoint, I find that the way Singapore is structured and our ideology of meritocracy definitely pushes the disadvantaged to crime. It maybe argued that they only have themselves to blame but I believe no one would desire doing something that is illegal, however when people have to resort to crime to get what they want, it definitely call for our attention.

Women and Family-Week 4

China Women (Wong Xing Wuan)

 

Many at times, when we discuss about the effects of the social change where the females step into the workforce, we focus mainly on the benefits the females reap from this process, so is the picture as rosy as it is depicted or are we overlooking some important repercussions of this social change.

 

It is known to all that the females are indeed taking up roles that are not so conventional, the image of females that will come to our mind immediately in the past would be the motherly figure who stays in the home and care for the children, yet times have changed and our impression of females have changed rather drastically too. Now, we can visualize the females in working suit with a briefcase on her left and a PDA on her right. She no longer has an apron over her neck. Yet, such a social change has been slowly taking place since the 1920s, in the era of Great Depression. In the 21^st century, it is no surprise that a woman can multitask by taking up dual roles of a mother who take care of the child and also double up as a career woman to earn an extra income for the family. These are the super moms.

 

Super moms can be found in almost anywhere in the world, even in traditional countries like China, we can feel the impact of females in the workforce. However, is there any reason we should celebrate for the rise of super moms? I believe not.

 

In China, we have to take note that it functions under socialism, but the economy is opening up and wooing different markets to invest in their economy. Thus, this is a great leap for the economy of China. As a conservative country, the state has deployed some not so fair measures that resulted in inequality between the genders. One of which includes, male breadwinner bias in wage employment. This resulted in the vulnerability of the female because of the differential treatment of the genders imposed by the state. One thing to note is that in year 2000, the percentage of state-owned firms is 69.9% which makes up majority of the economy, thus when such measures are encouraged, (Liu, 2007) the females would face a very huge problem. I believe that when they state exercise such a measure, they have in mind that the males are usually the breadwinners of the family thus it is more important to ensure that they retain their job so as to support the family. However, in my perspective, there are also a rising and significant number of women as the breadwinner of the family, as a single parent, thus the policy is unfair and do no justice to these female because of the traditional ideology of “men dominate the outside, women dominate the inside” that provided the employers a reason to retrench the women since they are viewed as being readily embracing their job as a home maker once again.

 

For the case of China, we focus on the discussion of the unfair treatment of the women in the workplace instead of discussing the role as a super mom and how hectic it would be, but that does not mean that the Chinese career women do not face such a problem. Similar to the career women in the Western countries and East Asia, the China working mothers face intense stress by juggling both their work and family. Statistic shows that there is higher participation in the household chores by the males than in the past, but there is still unequal distribution of household chores by the genders. In my standpoint, males conventionally have been the ones in charge of earning income back to support the family, thus they have been socialized since childhood that they do not have a part to play in the household chores, yet times have changed and as the number of working moms increased, there would also be a rise in children growing under such environment and they would eventually have a change in mindset of males helping out with the household chores. This would be of great help for the women, instead of being over burdened by both work and family.

 

In 1980s to 1990s, women make up 40% of the workforce in China, yet as minority, they are accounted for 60% of the number of workers being laid-off. (Liu, 2007) This statistic is evidence of the unfair treatment of women in the workforce, and in my perspective, the reason for this is the socialization of us believing that males should be the one dominating the workforce, especially in a socialist state in China, the rights of the women re usually being undermined. This breakdown of the social relations between the state and its people, in this case the working women, will lead to more social problems, in times like this when the women have access to education and are more ambitious. It will be a breeding ground for feminist movements.

 

Reference:

Feminist Economics 13(3 – 4), July/October 2007, 125 – 158 (GENDER DYNAMICS AND REDUNDANCY IN URBAN CHINA) Jieyu Liu

Work and Trade -Week 3

Child Labour (Wong Xing Wuan)

When we talk about work and trade, we will usually relate it to the grown ups, often forgetting another group of labors, who have been greatly involved in the workforce, doing the menial chores, despite their tender age.

I would like to discuss the social problem of child labour, in global context. Statistics show that one in every 6 children is employed as child labour. And most of the times, they have to work in extreme harsh conditions, like in the mining fields and in the agricultural fields, working with highly dangerous machines. These children usually live in poverty, and have no chance to receive any form of education. As young as the age of five, the child can be found in a rich family as a domestic helper. This not just show the disparity in the income gap between the rich and poor, but also the social problem of child labour that is very serious in the current global context.

I perceive that the biggest problem of child labour is that the child are exposed to being exploited and abused. A tender child are usually unable to voice out their unhappiness and the inequality treatment they receive, and thus are easily abused. For example, the children tend to work for intolerably long hours with minimum rest given to them, they are exploited to ensure the efficiency of the system without the care for their basic right. It is a big question of how these child labors manage to get themselves a job, of course we take into account that it is involuntary on their art to step out to work as as a young age. In my perspective, having a child exposed to these extreme working conditions are cruel and authorities should take measures to prevent the domination of such social problem. A child who has been put through all these as a child labour would be socialized to be very different from an urban child from at least a middle class who receives education. This is a crucial point for discussion because this would play a very important role in the path the child will take. Without education, the child who has to be a child labour would have very minimal opportunity to climb the corporate ladder since he lacks the access to education and neither would he be given equal opportunity as a child who is educated. Especially when the child take up roles that are rather meaningless like fixing certain components to the machine, or throwing certain materials into the machineries. He would not be able to learn anything much, though this division of labour is advocated by Adam Smith to be highly efficient. It gives the labors no skill nor knowledge, very much so when they are children, when they are kept in a tiny environment handling meaningless chores. There is no skill or knowledge imparted to these children, so ultimately, they do not gain anything from their working experience.

This is very different if they actually could receive formal education. A child who can go to school and learn how to communicate, learn about the global world, learn different kind of skills will be very different from one that is merely constrain in the tiny department of a large factory. Education no doubt is to prepare a child for work in the future, yet the scope of job an educated person would differ greatly from one that has no education. The scope of the job also determines the income one receives. Thus, it is evident that if a child is engaged in the activity of child labour, he would have serious problems when he tries to integrate into the society, without any skill and knowledge, even if he could, he will still be earning the bare minimal income and struggle for survival.

A recent trend of child labour that has been brought to light by some academics is the migration of child labour. This issue is concerning the children who has been trafficked to work in another country. The problem involves not just child labour but also human trafficking. In “Children Working Beyond Their Localities” by Roy Huijsmans, it is explained that human trafficking takes place when the person is being forced or deceived to migrate to elsewhere to work. But, in the case when children are involved, it is highly ambiguous. Every process of the migration of the child must be harmful to the child to be considered a case of human trafficking. However, when it is voluntary by the child, to dream of ” working in another country as it would help my family conditions and my brothers and sisters get through hardship” , but the truth may not be as rosy a picture eventually. Thus, it is highly ambiguous to even define the problem, what more to say find a solution to these problems. The child usually hears the perfect story of working abroad without understanding the scope of their job and the nature of work, some children from Laos found themselves as sex workers in Thailand. The children are exploited and abused in such a manner where there is no human rights to be argued. These children from Laos cannot get back to their own country and found themselves in a foreign country. There was no way back for them. In this case, the severity of exploitation is very high.

This inherently is the one of the cause of different class and inequalities. The nature of childhood differs from a child who lives in poverty, to a middle class child, to a child from an elite family. This will in turn determine the path they take, the job they take up, the income they earn and the social class they would be in. As globalization stays as the buzzword, there are so many social problems can come hand in and with it. And in my standpoint, we should place importance to the young and tender, since socialization starts from childhood and goes a long way from there.

Reference

1. Children Working Beyond Their Localities by Roy Huismans