ARI Working Paper Series

The assembling of a Singapore history has involved a process of mutation. From a view that when Raffles landed in 1819 Singapore was to all intents and purposes tabula rasa, and that any attempt to argue to the contrary was to highlight the distinctive trajectories of the different ethnic migrant communities, and hence was fissiparous, the Singapore Story coalesced in the late 1990s around the narrative of the courage and achievements of the PAP leaders. The first attempts at a history of post-colonial Singapore emphasised the ‘battle against the Communists’ who were depicted as the anti-national elements. The Singapore Story historicised the next chapter of the drama — the traumatic separation of Singapore from Malaysia in 1965, now celebrated as the birth of the nation. The ethnic diversity of the population rather than the Communist threat emerged as the most fundamental challenge to nation-building in the post-Cold War era, as witnessed in the emphasis given in official discourses to the riots that broke out when Singapore was part of Malaysia, glossed as ‘race riots’ rather than as politically-instigated tensions. Race is posited as limiting to national unity in Singapore, which justifies the state’s policing of discourses and activities for the sake of ‘racial harmony’, achieved only with the tolerance on the part of the majority ethnic Chinese. At the same time, ‘culture’, defined by the use of ‘mother tongue’ and as ‘non-Western’ projects, is highly valorised. In combination, this privileges those who regard themselves as cultural vanguards of the ethnic Chinese population, boosted by the selection of the China market as a critical economic battlefield in which Singapore has an edge over global competitors.