从愿意接受少数种族当总理的新闻谈起[^0]
News about happy to have a non-Chinese PM for Singapore
根据早报2019年3月29日的报道:“...财长王瑞杰...受邀出席南洋理工大学常年部长论坛时,在场学生绝大多数举手表示愿意接受非华族总理。王瑞杰说年轻人这么认为是好现象,但据他与各年龄与背景国人接触的经验,他不认为我国已作好准备。...”[^1]。
对此,英文报直接引用财长的原话说:“...我会说年轻人会相当自在(接受非华族总理)是一个非常积极的现象,这正是因为我们长期以来一直(在)我们的制度中强调不分种族、言语、宗教政策的(结果)。所以那就是为什么我们年轻人的成长过程(与长辈们比起来)是非常不同的,因此你(们)已经做好了准备。我确实认为在适当的时候,当有足够的人那么想的时候,我们将会,我们可能会,有少数(种族)成为国家的领导人...但是,如果你问我,(在目前)就整个投票人口而言,(接受非华族总理)会成为(选择的)结果吗,我个人并不这么认为。(注:所有括号部分是笔者所添加)... I will say that it is a very positive sign that the young people will be quite comfortable, precisely because our policy of regardless of race, language, religion has been an emphasis in our system for so long. So that is why our young people grow up in a very different way and therefore you are quite ready. I do think that at the right time, when enough people think that way, we would have, we may have, a minority who becomes the leader of the country...But if you ask me, that whether across the voting population, would that be the outcome, I personally don't think so...”[^2]。
笔者同意财长的说法。特别是我国不分种族、言语、宗教的政策,在经过多年的发展后,是有非常丰富的,追求与确保多元种族社会的平衡与公正平等发展,以及各族和谐共存的共识内涵的。因此人们如何理解与认同不分种族、言语、宗教政策的基本含意,对年轻一代和年长一代(的彼此沟通及建立共识)是同等重要的[^3]。所以它值得我们不时的探讨与厘清,也是今后教育部培训更多教师引导学生坦诚探讨种族宗教课题时应该讨论的问题[^4]。
简单的说,我国信约中“…不分种族、言语、宗教…”这句话与下述的两个事实(或立国原则)有关:
(1)新加坡是个多元种族、语言、文化与宗教共存的国家。无论好坏,我们立国以来就一直是以正面积极的态度来接受和管理这些多元共存的事实。
(2)我国并不推行同化政策,年轻人比较熟悉的美国,则是主要以盎格鲁-撒克逊族群(Anglo-Saxon)的语言、文化及基督教新教信仰为主导的大熔炉“同化”政策。所以各族在新加坡都能保留及延续本身的种族身份、语言、文化和宗教。因此,我国有四大官方语言及强制的双语教育,独立初期还有各种不同语文源流的学校,而英语则是作为大家的共同语和工作语(以及后来的主要教学语),让各族能得到公平的对待及团结合作。
多年来,我国各族正是在认同这种尊重,接受,以及平衡管理和包容多元种族文化共存的精神基礎上宣誓:“我们是新加坡公民,誓愿不分种族、言语、宗教,团结一致, …”。这种态度与精神是新加坡国民身份认同的一大基础,也是我国国家信约的本意。
因此 ,“…不分种族、言语、宗教…”这句话,并不是要排斥、消灭、淡化或同化我国的多元种族社会,也不是要求或暗示各族该放弃本身的种族身份、语言、文化和宗教,而是要积极正面的接受与对待它(即采取Regardful的态度)。并在包容这些原有的多元化社会基础上,推行政策让各族人民不分种族、言语、宗教团结一致(即强调Regardless的精神),在建国的共同命运与生活经历的塑造下,逐渐再创加新的共同价值观,新的新加坡文化。这就是更具有新加坡特色的新加坡:一个包容各族的语言、文化、以及本土文化与价值观的多元种族国家。对此,新加坡政策研究所所长在2016年发表的观点,《The ‘We’ in our National Pledge》,有更多的分析,建议读者不妨上网查看[^5]。
最后,对于我国是否做好准备迎接首位非华族总理的问题,我们不妨从下述的例子寻找可能的答案。
2008年11月,美国选出首位少数种族的黑人总统奥巴马先生,全世界同声喝彩,也引发本地一波我们几时也能选出少数种族总理的讨论浪潮。
其实我们都知道,新、美两国的多元种族政策模式是有所不同的,我们不同化各族,美国则以同化为主流。例如奥巴马先生,尽管可能没有明文规定,但是他在语言、文化及宗教上是被期待需要与主流社会一致的。他的当选,显示的是美国同化多元种族政策的巨大成就。
而我国若有一天能选岀贤能的少数种族同胞为总理,他或她在语言、文化及宗教上是不必(也不会被期待)被同化的,当然英语将保持做为各族之间的共通语、各族的权利、强制的双语及母语教育也不变,这将是我国包容多元种族多元文化共存的政策所期待的成就。
显然的,越多国人能理解与支持新加坡的多元种族政策模式,就越能增加社会的共识及减低一些人民的担忧[^6],我国各年龄与背景的国人也就能越快的准备好迎接首位非华族的少数种族总理了。
以下为本文的注解(Ref):
- [^0]
上网日期Posted: 01/Jan/2020(1月1号) --- 更新日期Updated: 04/Aug/2020(8月4号) --- 草稿Draft: (原稿30/03/2019 - 01-07/04/2019) (发稿07/04/2019, [x]) (修稿17-20/07/2020)
- [^1]
《迎接首位非华族总理?王瑞杰:整体尚未准备好》,联合早报,2019年3月29日。
迎接首位非华族总理?王瑞杰:整体尚未准备好@
- [^2]
《Singapore will have ethnic minority PM at right time, says Heng Swee Keat》,The Straits Times,29/Mar/2019,中文部分是笔者改编自谷歌翻译。
Singapore will have ethnic minority PM at right time, says Heng Swee Keat@
- [^3]
由于不分种族、言语、宗教(regardless of race, language or religion)是国家信约(National Pledge)中的句子,大多数国人都十分熟悉,更是越来越多论者喜欢引用来一语带过一些想法,概念和假设的重点句子。所以,要人们在不谈到各种相应的政策,而只从提起信约中的这个句子,就能够马上简要的理解与认同它原本的含意,显然是十分重要的。
- [^4]
《王乙康:培训更多教师 引导学生坦诚探讨种族宗教课题》,联合早报,2020年7月17日。
https://www.zaobao.com.sg/znews/singapore/story20200717-1069713
"......新生代学生更愿意探讨种族宗教课题,教育部下来会培训更多教师,让他们更好地引导学生就这些课题对话。......"
- [^5]
关于我国国家信约(National Pledge)中的,“regardless of race, language or religion”,这句话是建立在包容而不是要排斥多元种族、言语、宗教共存的基础上。新加坡政策研究所所长,贾纳达斯.蒂凡(Janadas Devan, Director, Institute of Policy Studies),在2016年一个题为“The ‘We’ in our National Pledge”的演讲中有很好的说明。
"......The formulation in the Pledge as we know it – “one united people, regardless of race, language or religion” – is more realistic in its command. It does not deny racial, linguistic or religious differences exist, let alone call for their obliteration. Rather, we are enjoined to go beyond them......"
"......Singapore’s founding leaders recognised that we cannot be One without also acknowledging that we are Many, any more than one can produce a rainbow by smudging the different colours......"
"......This is the first and most important thing we should note about the “we” in our Pledge: It does not call for the erasure of differences. We are not enjoined to forget our separate identities. Rather, we are urged to accept our plurality. And we are urged to go beyond them – go beyond our separate racial, linguistic, religious, cultural identities, so as to encompass the imagined community that lies beyond our differences......"
参考文章:
https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/the-we-in-our-national-pledge
https://www.ipscommons.sg/the-we-in-our-national-pledge/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxsA-NuBkwU&list=PL9Qs1H4CimXbqrkip8vYLJtW7u-K7BtYi&index=1
(更多详情,请参考:The 'We' in our National Pledge@和The 'We' in our National Pledge (YouTube)@)
The ‘We’ in our National Pledge
By Janadas Devan
Jan 19, 2016
Janadas Devan is Director of IPS. This excerpt of his opening remarks at the Singapore Perspectives 2016 conference was published in The Straits Times on 19 January 2016.
- [^6]
为什么会有担忧?坦白说,随着各族的年轻一代及子孙都“英语化”的事实,如果将来他们要推行美国式的种族同化政策(当然不包括宗教的同化,因为各宗教有足够的信众支持,有能力反制),没有人能够保证到时还会有多少人(包括主张各方面要有民主制衡的各政党)有能力及有意愿去制衡它?目前我们只能在教育上下功夫(“打预防针”),例如英文报报导,教育部长王乙康说:"......We are constantly under the influence of American social media, American pop culture, but we are not American. Our histories are totally different......This will be a topic teachers will have to carefully engage students on......"。
参考报章:TheStraitsTimes,JUL 17, 2020
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/in-depth-conversations-on-religion-race-crucial-in-schools-ong-ye-kung
《In-depth conversations on religion, race crucial in schools: Ong Ye Kung》
"......Young people today have a different view of race and religion as compared with older generations, and conversations in school play a big role in helping students navigate differences, Education Minister Ong Ye Kung said yesterday......"
"......MOE is training more teachers who can specialise in this and can facilitate such discussions, said Mr Ong. But he emphasised that context matters in discussing race and religion......"
"......
"We are constantly under the influence of American social media, American pop culture, but we are not American. Our histories are totally different."
This will be a topic teachers will have to carefully engage students on, he noted.
"The starting point has got to be our own conversations and dialogues. You are bound to discover that students are reading things on the Internet, getting ideas that are more 'Americanised', for example, and when you bring it up, then you can have a contestation of ideas respectfully, and then that is how students get to internalise them."
......"