On those ridiculous OB markers (though I wonder why there's a need to refer to the economic aspect of stifling free thought and speech in the headline):
TO PROMOTE ENTREPRENEURIAL DRIVE AND CREATIVITY...
Why have OB markers?
I REFER to the Insight articles on OB markers revisited (ST, June 21). What concerns me are the consequences of having out-of-bounds, or OB, markers.
In such an environment, is it any surprise that there is a stifling of entrepreneurial drive? The idea that some things cannot be challenged is surely not the mentality of a risk-taker.
Sterility and a lack of creativity are surely tied to the decision to tell people what they can and can't think about. Not to mention a feeling of being an alien in one's place of abode.
Are apathy and lack of awareness among the public not clearly linked to being told what one can or cannot think about? After all, if you are not interested in what I have to say about the most important of issues, why should I bother saying anything at all?
Shall I limit my comments to bus-fare hikes and the new train line? Indeed, these are the sort of discussions which engage the nation presently.
Is a lack of social cohesion a surprise? Avoiding public discussion of what are considered explosive issues only means that the society never gets a chance to grow in understanding. How long are people supposed to be protected from their own supposed irrationality?
The idea that one should not think about some things because otherwise there will be trouble stems from a patronising view of the mass of society. Maybe it is valid. I really can't say I know.
But again, not discussing things openly does not mean that people don't have opinions. It does not mean that issues will go away. All it means is that there is an artificial environment of people living beside each other but not with each other.
Strange ideas grow in strength because they are not challenged in open discussion. For what is not aired in open discussion will be whispered among like-thinking people in corridors. Woeful it will be when somehow these ideas gain momentum despite attempts to control the ideas that can be circulated.
When I think about the basis for a belief in the need for OB markers, what comes to mind is a father with a brood of children who aren't really able to think straight and make the right choices. So the father draws lines and says, thus far but no farther.
Whether this is a true portrayal of Singapore society, I cannot say. I do know that I am not a child and have little interest in discussing things when treated like one.
As for the rest of the society, as long as the father goes on treating them as children, he can only expect that they will behave like children. To treat them as children and then expect them to be creative, entrepreneurial individuals with passionate opinions on issues seems misguided to me.
THOMAS KOSHY