Sociologists are interesting lots. They called themselves "pseudo-scientists". Honestly, I was amused by their scientific journal style papers. But then again, I'm easily amused lately.
They have comments and views in every single observable and commentable event in society. Trying to find explanations to trends, most of them found themselves walking on dangerous grounds. How can they not be? Sociologists are critics of society. Man-marked by government, they are either roped into state's affiliated societies (obligated and pressured to take up state's views) or black-listed (overtly critized by government and risk losing their rice bowl) . Either way, the one on losing is always these "society scientists". Well, some developed tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. Lectures conducted by them were never boring. I'm amused and amazed by the level of disillusionment they have on our society. If you read some of the reading materials, you'll know why. Material possesions and economic advancement are placed above all things, creating people without a certain intangible soul. Logic of capitalism is the common sense. Why marriage age keeps on increasing, they asked? When life priority is advancements in career and financial ability, nothing else really matter. But, it isn't that bad, is it? Coins have two sides, so do social issues. Yep, in a way, there's a goal to achieve. Society and state are progressing. The question is where to?

Meritocracy promotes advancement and cause people to be competitive and goal driven. But, why is some ethnic group is left behind. Meritocracy suppose to provide equal chance and opportunity to everyone who adheres to it. Well, I would say it lies in the attitude. Certain practises in their culture significantly stalled their progress in society especially when it is closely link to religion.

One thing that sadden me the most is the extent of rationalization of religion in this society. The state recognised religion's influence on the people. Apparently, modernisation does not lead to secularization which is observed in other secular societies. The state indirectly regulates religous activities. From each religion's ideologies to religious practises, the state constantly cast a watchful eyes on them. Basically, the state wants everything to be in line with nation building process. Lovely, Durkheim's view on religion as a form of social control and social cohesion is realised. Jehovah's Witnesses was banned in 1980s because of their convictions on certain issues. Not that I advocate practises of this cult but in general, where is the sanctity of religion?

One can't deny the comfortable life and luxuries the state has provided. Indeed they are capable of providing material needs but what about the sense of community?sense of belonging?an identity the people can call their own. Why is the Palestinians share such strong belonging to each other?Why is a state is also a nation for the Irish?I think we should evaluate on time and place right after independence. The state concentrated too much on plugging itself to global economy that it forgot that it's the people that comprises a nation. Yes, post independence was a critical period that defined the chance of survival. But, we must not forget that as an entre port, this place was made up of immigrants and so called indegenous Malays. But, even the Malays came from Indonesia and Malaysia. Shared history was short and there wasn't much interaction between ethnic communities despite being a "multicultural" society. Individually, there may be some shared history but collectively, different places had different meaning to different ethnic groups. Japanese occupation period may be the few shared time and places.
Gellner states that nation is a product of modernity. However, this country is not a nation yet. It has all the physical characteristics of nations (e.g infrastructure). Until now, people still identify themselves firstly as of certain ethnic group and secondly as a citizen. Only when these people are abroad, citizenship is used as a form of identification instead of race or ethnic. There's still a long way to go for this state to become a nation. Fortunately, the government is rather flexible in their approaches and responses towards certain issues. This is signify by the intention of then PM to have a more "open" government; a significant shift from a more stern and authoritarian government of his predecesor. Election is around the corner. Let's see whether Big brother will still be..well..big brother. It will be interesting to see a "shift". They say suffering tend to bring people together. Who knows it will be a catalysis to speed up this construction of national identity,

~KatZ~

Designer: unlovedd%-
Image hosting: Photoshop.
Brushes: x o
Inspirations&Basecodes: :D