The rising number of foreigners has made Singapore’s search for its identity every more elusive. Do you agree?

We live in a world of flux today – with mass human migration across national borders, time zones, and continents rapidly becoming as convenient as taking a trip to the supermarket. Amidst this ever shrinking world, foreigner have pervaded and invaded every cosmopolitan city, including Singapore. It is thus hardly surprising that managing the influx of foreigners has become a prime concern for many governments. In the 2011 Singapore general elections, the issue of foreign talent quickly became a major sticking point, almost ousting the incumbent party PAP who had been in power for over four decades. This, however, seems to be much ado about nothing – foreigners have not, in fact, diluted Singapore’s identity, but actually diversified and enriched it.

Some critics have purported that foreigners remain tightly insulated within their secular communities, isolated from Singaporeans. Consequently, Singapore’s society has become very heterogeneous, comprised of many groups of foreigners and not a united, homogenous collective whole. However, it is unwise to claim that foreigners are unable to assimilate into society just because foreigner communities, such as Chinatown and Little India, exist. In Singapore, it is not uncommon to see foreigners helping out their local community centres as volunteer workers. Through such experiences, foreigners get to interact with society on a personal level, and come to become a part of Singapore. Even if a foreigner does not voluntarily participate in such activities, it is almost impossible for them to avoid coming into contact with Singaporean life. Foreigners can be spotted everywhere in Singaporean life – be in on public transport, in local hawker centres, or at community centres. In these thriving hotspots of Singapore culture, foreigners will definitely learn about the ‘Singaporean way’ of doing things – such as reserving seats with a packet of tissue paper. Additionally, many foreigners come into Singapore to work. Working in Singapore, in and of itself, will help ensure foreigners assimilate into society, as they are forced to interact with their Singaporean colleagues through the course of their work. Moreover, working in Singapore makes foreigners feel that they have a personal stake in the country – they have contributed to the development and rise of Singapore. This might help to establish national pride, and consequently a sense of belonging in Singapore.

It may also be tempting to believe that foreigners, who have been accused of ‘stealing Singaporean jobs’, create tensions and rifts in society, which in turn hinder the development of a collective Singaporean identity. However, this proposition fails when we acknowledge that foreigners are often not in direct competition with locals for jobs. It is important to understand that many foreigners, particularly those who come from poor, undeveloped countries, do not often compete with Singaporeans directly for jobs. These foreigners mainly work as construction workers or cleaners – jobs which fall under the umbrella of unskilled labour, and which require long hours put in with little pay. Many Singaporeans, even unemployed Singaporeans, do not wish to work in such jobs, in favour of higher-paying jobs at the managerial level. Therefore, it can be said that foreigners play a highly crucial role – that of physical national building – which Singaporeans are often unwilling to do. If anything, Singaporeans should be thankful to these foreigners, who make cheap hawker fare and affordable housing possible due to their cheap labour. It is particularly notable that Singapore’s unemployment rate is close to zero, and that almost every Singaporean can find a job. Under such circumstances, it seems unjustified to complain that foreigners stealing our jobs have causing a significant societal issue. Instead, it seems more plausible that the real reason for tension between Singaporeans and foreigners is due to an inexplicable sense of xenophobia. Analysing this issue from this perspective, it then becomes apparent that the root problem is not an influx of foreigners, but a sense of insecurity on the part of Singaporeans. How then can we blame foreigners – who have contributed much to our nation building – for destroying the Singaporean identity?

There is also a striking irony that the people who complain about the influx of foreigners were the same people whose parents, barely forty years ago, migrated to Singapore. Singapore is, at its very heart, a new society comprised of immigrants and foreigners from various parts of the globe. Therefore, instead of arbitrarily creating a divide between ‘new foreigners’ and ‘locals’ – who are actually just ‘foreigners who arrived in Singapore earlier’, we should try and establish a Singaporean identity which embraces different cultures. A national identity is built upon the culture and beliefs of its people – which in the case of Singapore, its foreigners. Singapore’s population has a large percentage of foreigners, and to exclude them from the construction of our national identity would be foolish and arbitrary. For proof that this model has succeeded, we only need to look to America, a nation which a particularly strong national identity and spirit. America was, in its early years, an immigrant society, comprised of individuals who flocked there during the Gold Rush. By embracing and accepting the cultures of their immigrants, America has successfully created a national identity which is not only very strong, but also extremely inclusive – their citizens, regardless of race or religion, all feel that they are part of the American movement. Isn’t that what Singapore wants? Actually, roots of such a model taking place in Singapore have become evident. Singapore celebrates the national holidays of all major cultures – Christmas, Chinese New Year, Selemat Hari Raya, and Deepavali, for instance. Singapore’s local cuisine, a major part of any nation’s identity, has become a potpourri and a literal melting pot of different cultures. In the same hawker centre, Nasi Lemak, a Malay dish, Roti Prata, an Indian dish, and Char Kuay Teow, a Chinese dish, may be sold. This is living evidence that Singapore is on its way to building a unique national identity from the combination of diverse cultures.

Ultimately, Singapore is a migrant society, one which was run by the Europeans, financed by the Indians, built by the Chinese, and protected by the Malays. It is undeniable that foreigners form the very pillars of our nation, and define our very existence today. To therefore reject foreigners as a detriment to our national identity would be unwise and divisive. At the end of the day, we should relish the myriad of cultures flourishing within Singapore, accept them, and move on to create our national identity.