Sunday, May 02, 2004
City-zen
Glocal
In the contemporary “glocal” world, an increasing number of people are spending a substantial part of their lives in foreign lands as non-citizens. It is no longer uncommon for today's cosmopolites to be a New Yorker, Parisian and Londoner at a given time or for distinct periods, whilst keeping their citizenship. This contemporary nomadic phenomenon raises thorny issues relating to the rights of citizenship. Voting from overseas, national obligations, etc are just amongst the many possible pricks that can form a separate thesis. Without entering this potentially long drawn discussion, one of the questions that can be raised out of this phenomenon is: What does it mean to be a citizen of a city-state such as medieval Venice or contemporary Singapore? What does it mean to be Singaporean?
Citizen or inhabitant?
Citizenship implies nationality. Whereas, being a “city-zen” – such as a New Yorker, Parisian or Londoner - is more about being an inhabitant and cultural immersion. The two contrasting features would not normally be an issue as cities and countries are on separate levels of a political hierarchy. Therefore, a Japanese living in Paris can still call himself a Parisian whilst being a Japanese national. The same Japanese national cannot however consider himself truly French. In the case of city-states, where two distinct levels of the political hierarchy merge, the line between “city-zen” and citizen becomes as fine as the edge of a scalpel blade. Taking the example of Singapore - A Singaporean is a citizen of Singapore, but he can also be an inhabitant of Singapore. Where do we draw the line then? Who can consider themselves as Singaporean?
The blade-thin line is a matter because citizenship comes with certain rights, such as that of the power to vote and other duties as well as privileges. For example, holding a country’s passport might make it trans-border movements easier.
City-State: Singapore
Singapore is without a doubt a global city where many expatriates of different origins and professions gather to live, work and play. Many of them identify themselves with Singapore, just as I identified myself with Paris during my Parisian years. How should a non-citizen in Singapore associate themselves with Singapore?
After almost 40 years of nation building and establishing ourselves on the world map, perhaps our graduation certificate from the “School of Global Cities” would be coming up with a suitable title for all who dwell in Singapore and who identify themselves with the values of Singapore. Some immediate possibilities come to mind – SingapOrang*, Temasek-er** or Nanyang-er***. Or maybe it might be a better idea to identify ourselves with our towns, Hougang-ian, Yishun-er or Orcharder...hmmm, or maybe not.
I guess that is the trouble of being an island-city-state-nation.
* Orang - is Malay for man.
** Temasek is the name of Singapore from the pre-colonial days.
*** Nanyang - translated literally to "south of the ocean" was the name given to Singapore and the other regional countries by the Chinese immigrants from the colonial days.
In the contemporary “glocal” world, an increasing number of people are spending a substantial part of their lives in foreign lands as non-citizens. It is no longer uncommon for today's cosmopolites to be a New Yorker, Parisian and Londoner at a given time or for distinct periods, whilst keeping their citizenship. This contemporary nomadic phenomenon raises thorny issues relating to the rights of citizenship. Voting from overseas, national obligations, etc are just amongst the many possible pricks that can form a separate thesis. Without entering this potentially long drawn discussion, one of the questions that can be raised out of this phenomenon is: What does it mean to be a citizen of a city-state such as medieval Venice or contemporary Singapore? What does it mean to be Singaporean?
Citizen or inhabitant?
Citizenship implies nationality. Whereas, being a “city-zen” – such as a New Yorker, Parisian or Londoner - is more about being an inhabitant and cultural immersion. The two contrasting features would not normally be an issue as cities and countries are on separate levels of a political hierarchy. Therefore, a Japanese living in Paris can still call himself a Parisian whilst being a Japanese national. The same Japanese national cannot however consider himself truly French. In the case of city-states, where two distinct levels of the political hierarchy merge, the line between “city-zen” and citizen becomes as fine as the edge of a scalpel blade. Taking the example of Singapore - A Singaporean is a citizen of Singapore, but he can also be an inhabitant of Singapore. Where do we draw the line then? Who can consider themselves as Singaporean?
The blade-thin line is a matter because citizenship comes with certain rights, such as that of the power to vote and other duties as well as privileges. For example, holding a country’s passport might make it trans-border movements easier.
City-State: Singapore
Singapore is without a doubt a global city where many expatriates of different origins and professions gather to live, work and play. Many of them identify themselves with Singapore, just as I identified myself with Paris during my Parisian years. How should a non-citizen in Singapore associate themselves with Singapore?
After almost 40 years of nation building and establishing ourselves on the world map, perhaps our graduation certificate from the “School of Global Cities” would be coming up with a suitable title for all who dwell in Singapore and who identify themselves with the values of Singapore. Some immediate possibilities come to mind – SingapOrang*, Temasek-er** or Nanyang-er***. Or maybe it might be a better idea to identify ourselves with our towns, Hougang-ian, Yishun-er or Orcharder...hmmm, or maybe not.
I guess that is the trouble of being an island-city-state-nation.
* Orang - is Malay for man.
** Temasek is the name of Singapore from the pre-colonial days.
*** Nanyang - translated literally to "south of the ocean" was the name given to Singapore and the other regional countries by the Chinese immigrants from the colonial days.
0 Comments:
