![The Internet The Internet](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/internet_64.png)
![Your Rights Online Your Rights Online](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/yro_64.png)
Singapore Bloggers Charged Under Sedition Act 347
ChannelNewsAsia is reporting that for the first time in at least 10 years Singapore has invoked the sedition act and charged two local bloggers for posting racist comments on an online forum. From the article: 'Said Singaporean blogger Benjamin Lee (Mr Miyagi):" A lot of them will be looking at their blogs and wondering if they made any legally seditious remarks. I think because of the way this will be played up, it's negative publicity for the Singapore blogging community."'
Link? (Score:3, Informative)
Is this the link [channelnewsasia.com]?
--
Superb hosting [dreamhost.com] 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).
Re:Link? (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps the original author was afraid that the Slashdot effect would put a chink in the armor of the hosting company's intrusion detection system, and was just trying to help keep the log files spic and span of extraneous hits. In any case, thanks for not being niggardly with the links.
All these damned accronyms on Slashdot. (Score:3, Funny)
(click)
HOLY SHIT! Not Safe For Work!
Good thing it's lunch time and nobody's here.
Re:The Price of Being Chinese (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, what is more pathetic is that the West should stand up to such governments, but the West has been taken over by corporate lackeys who are only interested in bottom lines.
"We don't like what you do, but we like what you pay."
Arrrrgh... (Score:5, Funny)
Racism...
Freedom of speech...
Freedom of speech overrides natural desire to slowly boil racists...
*back to sleep*
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:4, Interesting)
I think racism is awful, but I'm glad I live in a country that allows people to speak their mind. I do, however, tire of people "playing the race card", which IMHO is just as bad as the racism itself. It detracts from the situations where the complaints are real.
Partially OT, so feel free to mod me down.
No conflict at all in here... (Score:4, Funny)
Ta-da, problem solved.
NEXT!
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2)
*Sigh* look at it like this. (Score:5, Insightful)
This means that you cannot combat racism by limiting information or expression. The only effective way you can combat racism is by countering it with good information-- demonstrating the racists wrong, rather than silencing them.
If you try to fight racism by silencing it, you are only hurting yourself in the long run. Even aside from the slippery slope problem, you inevitably wind up with a situation where the fact you are trying to silence these people brands them with a false stamp of legitimacy. The old "help help I'm being oppressed" thing is a powerful tool, even to those whose message is itself in favor of oppression; the racists can easily twist the fact the government is trying to silence them into an argument in their favor.
In the long run this just isn't helpful; it's like trying to put out a grease fire by pouring oil on it. No good will come of what Singapore is trying to do here, only collateral damage.
Online Forum Racists (Score:2)
So I set up a similar topic denying the US Civil War, with the same fallback position.
The Nazis were laughed at until they stopped coming back.
Laughter is an effective tool.
Re:*Sigh* look at it like this. (Score:5, Interesting)
This means that you cannot combat racism by limiting information or expression. The only effective way you can combat racism is by countering it with good information-- demonstrating the racists wrong, rather than silencing them.
I hope you will help by contributing to Wikipedia's page on Race and Intelligence [wikipedia.org].
It's a bit one-sided at the moment.
Always wan't to sell a t-shirt.... (Score:2)
Now you promise you won't steal my idea. Right?
Re:Always want to sell a t-shirt.... (Score:4, Funny)
DEATH TO ALL INTOLERANT PEOPLE!!!
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Racism doesn't exist in America anymore!" followed quickly by "Fucking niggers stealing hubcaps!" (Rural Western PA, about 2 months ago)
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2)
Would they treat someone differently if they were a different race or ethnicity? If yes, they are racist. Most of us are racist (or ethnist) to some degree or another. Those who yell "racist!" the loudest are merely trying to deflect attention away from their own racism.
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2)
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2)
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Any time you are in an enviro where there are any non white males. For example, if you mention that the black guy in the office had a typo in his report- the PC Police will call you racist. They will research and find out every you let a white person's typo slide by. They will call you racist
Then there are the times (which is most of them) where you completely forget about race until something is sai
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:2)
Re:Arrrrgh... (Score:4, Funny)
1) I seldom actually boil people. Usually I set them on a low simmer.
2) I freely admit to being fallible. There's a speck of the racist (or more) in all of us.
3) People I feel like boiling are the sort you would recognize as not just racist, but proudly so.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Link the article! (Score:2)
If this law were ever passed in the US, there would be more people in jail than out of it. Most News commentators gone, a lot of music illegal, etc.
I know this sounds trite, but I would rather have racists and other vermin allowed to be out in the open so at least we know who they are and can keep tabs on them. Once you force them underground, they become more dangerou
Is racist speech every ok? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is an honest question. As much as I hate racism and hate speech, I have to admit that Dave Chapelle, whose comedy many times has to do with race, is one of the best/original comedians out there today.
Of course his is meant for comedy rather than hate, but where does one draw the line?
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2, Insightful)
For instance, if you don't like someone, someone (lobbiest who 'contributed' to your 'fund') you know doesn't like someone, or you in general don't like what they are saying, you can at any point decide they are espousing 'hate speech|sedition|slander' and have them thrown into the dungeon.
This also applies to 'politically incorrect' speech, of course.
Only by all
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect a lot of egalitarians would say yes.
They'd like to think that everything having to do with intellectual abilities is equally distributed -- men/women blacks/jews/asians/whites/arabs. So I guess to them it is racist.
That's what's wrong with the concept of "hate speech" -- one man's gathering of facts and stastistics bees racist to another.
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Of course his is meant for comedy rather than hate, but where does one draw the line?
FTFA: "They are both being charged with committing a seditious act, by promoting feelings of ill-will and hostility between races in Singapore."
I think the difference is that laughing about, say, people's noses is ok.
Stating that their funny noses is a reason not to employ them, lodge them,
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Apparently you've never seen the Chapelle Show. Many of the skits he does where race is involved could be deemed as "promoting feelings of ill-will and hostility between races."
Noses???
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, if I say "White men are violent" is that racist?
What if I say "Black males comprise 6% of the population in the US, but perpetrate 40% of the murders" Is that racist, if a statement of fact, because I didn't qualify it by saying that the high rate is due to 200+ years of oppression?
If I say "everyone but Asians are dumb" is that racist? What If I show test scores that show that Asians are more
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the difference between the statement "the sky is blue because the gases in the atmosphere block the other wavelengths" and "the sky is blue because God loves only blue-eyed, blond-haired anglo-saxons, which are the Master Race (heil Hitler!)." It should be obvious which of those stateme
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
Believe me, there would be as many definitions as there are people.
For example, if I say "White men are violent" is that racist?
Yes. Try "Many white men are violent".
What if I say "Black males comprise 6% of the population in the US, but perpetrate 40% of the murders" Is that racist, if a statement of fact, because I didn't qualify it by saying that the high rate is due to 200+ years of oppression?
Not racist. Try "Blacks are murderers."
If I say "everyone but Asians are dum
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the language of people who study such things, this is called essentialism. It is very important to understand that the model minority myth about Asians can be just as pernicious as saying "All Negroes are savages."
Not racist. Try "Blacks are murderers."
It really depends. At its face, it's a misleading statement, and his "qualification" is too vague. Control for economic status and other factors, a
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
A: A pilot, you stupid racist!
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:2)
Answer: A doctor, you racist!
It plays on the fact that you are expecting a racist joke. As has been said over and over again, there are a lot fewer racial difference in the US than class differences. White people who wear those hilarious big pants and listen to rap music are more likely to drop out of high school and get pregnant at 13 than a black person who wears a tie....
Re:Is racist speech every ok? (Score:3, Funny)
how have they defined "racism"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good news, bad news (Score:2)
Caning . . . (Score:4, Interesting)
Wonder if that could happen here?
Re:Caning . . . (Score:2)
I guess I'd just rather have my ass wounding all up front, than spread out over an 8 year period.
If you did that in Singapore . . . . (Score:2)
I dunno, go to Singapore and give it a try and see.
Re:If you did that in Singapore . . . . (Score:2)
With that said, I would still rather be caned than fucked in the ass nightly for 8-15-25-40 years. Hence the comment. I guess being raped seems a bit worse than having my ass cheeks scarred and disfigured for the rest of my life.
And I'm not saying 8 years for firebombing SUVs is a-okay, either. I'm just pointing out that destruction of property - complete with vanda
Re:Caning . . . (Score:2, Informative)
First of all, caning as a principal only applies to violent crimes. In the situation regarding Michael Fay, the dumb American kid who vandalized cars, the story was that Fay _and_ a group of expatriots were valdalizing cars. At the time, it cost $13,000 to _buy the right_ to purchase a car (known as making a bid). And after you pay your $13,000 you can buy your car, which are all foreign cars by the way. There are no Singapore auto makers.
So
Re:Caning . . . (Score:2)
And I though Nevada's vehicle registration was exorbinant - guess I should quit my whining!
Re:Caning . . . (Score:3, Informative)
The CoE system (and its effects on car buying market) are not a constant, but essentially, the government restricts car ownership by restricting these certificates.
My in-laws have called the way these are distributed a 'lottery', and I took that literally. Wikipedia indicates that they are distributed via auction.
Whether via lottery or auction, thost of the CoE can be as much as the cost of the car. Also, S
Speaking as an Irishman (Score:5, Insightful)
What they couldnt say it in the article. (Score:2, Informative)
Ew. Article is getting pounded (yes, I actually READ them)...
Re:What they couldnt say it in the article. (Score:3, Insightful)
Confused! Not sure why everyone refers to bloggers as a community. It doesn't seem to be anymore a community than people who use public toilets, read Harry Potter or speak English. So I write a bit of nonsense on a website about a topic I barely understand and which nobody else is likely to be interested in and is only likely to be seen by some government web spider looking for s
Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:5, Interesting)
Drug dealers = death penalty. Vandalism = caning (remember that?). No selling gum. No chewing gum (at least in public). No joke.
While I don't think the totalitarianism is required, I will say that Singapore is VERY clear about the rules. Everybody knows them and everybody knows that if you break them, you do so at your own risk. They don't seem to have as many ambiguous laws as here in the US so it seems to work pretty well. The fact that some bloggers would post "maybe it will get me in trouble" stuff, is very ballsy.
Re:Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:2)
Well this is the first time the sedition act has been invoked in the past decade, and I can't believe nobody's made racist comments in that time, so I don't believe this is as common as you are making out.
From the article:
Re:Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:2)
Importing anything with Chinese writing on it is illegal in Singapore. Importing chewing gum is illegal. Lots and lots of stuff is illegal in Singapore.
This is the country that jailed a Jehova's Witness missionary (little old lady, none the less) for holding classes. JW is a "banned" religion in Singapore. I believe the rationale was the conflict between Singapore's mandatory military service and the resusal to
Re:Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:2)
Having been to Singapore many times, it is a VERY "tight" country. If you break the rules, the punishment is quite severe.
Back in 1993 William Gibson wrote an interesting piece on Singapore for Wired magazine: Disneyland With The Death Penalty [wired.com]
Re:Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:2)
Re:Surprised? Not. It's Singapore (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Kettle calling. (Score:5, Informative)
Don't make a mountain out of molehill. It's not even a close comparison.
Re:"soon to follow" (Score:3, Funny)
wth??
Yes! Damn you President Wilson for taking away my right to.... ummm... set up a national bank?
Re:"soon to follow" (Score:3, Funny)
Good show, really.
some background (Score:5, Informative)
singapore is an outpost of chinese in a malay region
it is a country independent of malaysia simply because the chinese there feared dilution of their power by malays
there is a history of friction between the chinese merchant class and the local malay population throughout the region, actually very similar to the resentment europeans had for the jewish merchant class that led to so much racially motivated nastiness there for centuries
malays and filipinos to this day complain of how they are treated by the chinese in singapore, who they say view them as little more than domestic servants or coolies
in the 1960s, under the guise of fighting communism, indonesians slaughtered thousands simply for having chinese ancestry... and confiscated their businesses
so maybe some of you who are very idealistically attached to the concept of free speech, without any mitigating conditions, perhaps you can at least understand why singapore would be so interested on clamping down on hate speech in its territory: it's not a big country, and it must remain at peace with its huge malay neighbors, at whom this hate speech is directed by some really stupid chinese bigotted bloggers
Re:some background (Score:4, Informative)
Not just Malaysians either - my friend told me that even up to a couple of years ago, you would see signs outside construction sites that said "Indians need not apply".
I guess they have bigger problems (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, that's right. If you take a group of people who already view themselves as racially, not culturally, superior to another and force them to limit their liberties so as to not offend the group they condescend to, their natural reaction will be to condescend even more because "clearly, those people are so weak that they can't even handle a bad attitude."
Conflicts like this usually have very, very deep roots and it never ceases to amaze me how American left-liberals can never fail to suggest to change a group's natural reaction instead of accepting it. Hate to break it to you people, but the reality is that the strong do not typically respect those that are weaker than they are. That is life. You do not expect a lion to respect a terrier, so why expect a group that is very economically and militarily powerful in their region to respect a group that is by comparison very weak? Are we not animals as well, and do not both religion and science agree that the strong does not respect the weak?
Yes, let's encourage them to reevaluate their attitudes and seek to become better people by accepting others' weakness. Do as the Bible idealizes, and encourage the lion to have the strength of will and character to lay down with the sheep. But do not think that it is natural, and do not think that a weekly class on "tolerance" is going to make them like those they tend to look down on. Besides, technically they already show tolerance toward them because tolerance simply means live-and-let live. It doesn't imply you like them or want anything to do with them. It means you tolerate them, which is basically what most people do to small children who behave like brats or yappy little dogs. What they need is brotherly/sisterly reconciliation between their groups, not some half-assed bullshit called tolerance.
define your terms (Score:2, Flamebait)
left-liberals: are those people who believe in a world free of racism?
"a group's natural reaction": what is this group? people of a certain ethnic background? what is their "natural reaction": to see as inferior another ethnic group?
"instead of accepting it": accepting what, exactly?
you sound like a racist
so
Re:some background (Score:2)
Re:some background (Score:2)
The place is fairly ready to blow up (Score:2)
Why does this have to be negative? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why does this have to be negative? (Score:2)
Re:Why does this have to be negative? (Score:2)
Please tell me you're not American.
Re:Why does this have to be negative? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sedition is an act of rebellion against the state. How is classifying racist comments as sedition appropriate?
The logic seems to be that "promoting feelings of ill-will and hostility between races in Singapore" is inherently seditious. You could redefine theft to be sedition using that logic (hey, it "promotes suspicion amongst neighbours in Singapore").
If racist comments are not tolerable in Singapore, then they should pass a law about that instead of leaving it up to an official to twist the meaning of an existing law out of all proportion to punish somebody for something he doesn't like.
This doesn't appear to be somebody breaking the law and getting caught, it appears to be somebody doing something legal but distasteful, and having somebody in the government abuse the law to pursue a vendetta because they don't like it.
Re:Why does this have to be negative? (Score:3, Interesting)
There is now harmony between the races, achieved by force, reeducation and enforced mixing in housing, education and military serv
One of these things is not like the other (Score:4, Insightful)
n : an illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government.
racism
n : discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race.
Re:One of these things is not like the other (Score:2)
Re:One of these things is not like the other (Score:2)
The government has declared (rightly or wrongly) racial incitement to be a danger to public order and stability. They therefore class such incitement as sedition.
And how long did you think. Danger to public order and stability is not the same as incitement to overthrow the government.
You're acting like the reaction to an alleged racist comment will alway be, "Gee, some joker just dissed me, let's start the Revolution."
S/editors (Score:2)
Whatever the reason, the thousands of people across the Web hearing about this story are doubtless feeling "disconnection anxiety" without
They were lucky... (Score:2)
Singapore cultural values are different.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Holding this contentious group together is a miracle given the tensions in the region. The economic success of Singapore is legendary in a region where its neighbors routinely slaughter each other- Indonesians with rebels, Malaysians with sectarian strife, Thai with sectarian strife, and so on. Singapore has to hold together ethnic Chinese, Malay, Tamils, as well as expats from all over the region, Euros, and so on. They take racial prejudice very seriously, and if they didn't they'd have bedlam.
Yes, Singapore is draconian in other ways, and is also known as the "Fine City" where every offense is a S$500 fine. They execute drug smugglers. So, don't smuggle drugs there. It's a follow-the-rules place. Not much crap is put up with. But it's not a police state, it just lacks a lot of democracy and free speech. This seems to suit the population, who are the envy of all of their neighbors. I've traveled the region many times; Singapore is the 52nd US State (after British Columbia)
Re:Singapore cultural values are different.... (Score:3, Interesting)
jehovah's witnesses are considered a dangerous cult and their members are jailed and their literature destroyed.
fellatio without vaginal sex (consensual or not) is a crime, for which you can be imprisoned for life. this law is still actively used for prosecutions to this day.
saying "fuck you" or making an obscene gesture to a woman is a criminal offense under section 509 of the singapore penal code.
nice place.
Depends on What Was Said (Score:2)
Mr Miyagi (Score:4, Informative)
His blog can be found here [miyagi.sg] and the post where he talks about the charges can be found here [miyagi.sg].
If You're Worried About Offence (Score:2, Insightful)
Even then you'll be accused of excluding someone from your conversation because of race.
Welcome to the Tyranny of the Easily Offended.
boycott? (Score:2)
I know I certainly won't be buying any more of their jams and jellies...
No Free Pass For Bloggers (Score:2, Insightful)
But, bloggers should expect no free pass compared with other means of publication. The laws that apply to publishing -- sanctions and protecions -- ought to apply to every blogger just as they do to the major commericial players.
Oh, well. (Score:2)
Their loss, really...
Not surprised (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not surprised - Okay Moderators... (Score:2)
This is either FLAMEBAIT -1
or INSIGHTFUL SARCASM +1.
Here's what happened (Score:4, Informative)
Singapore Math (Score:2)
First time offenders can be fined up to S$5,000, or jailed up to three years, or both.
So the bail is twice the fine. Interesting. Guess they really want to ensure that the fine gets paid.
The Article (Score:3, Informative)
Re:[NT] No Title (Score:3, Insightful)
Singapore Canes 1000 people per year. About 22% of all use inmates are raped at some point in their stays in prison. Which is really the less humane society?
Re:[NT] No Title (Score:2)
Re:Don't judge them to quickly (Score:2)
Re:Don't judge them to quickly (Score:2)
Both during extremely vicious and protracted national crises. That doesn't justify them in my view, and these acts didn't last, but there was some motivation behind them. Singapore is at peace and their authoritarianism isn't due to any pressing national problem. And most Americans (and most politicians) generally realize these laws are bad and our country shouldn't have ever passed them. So Singapore is at least fifty years behind the cur
Re:Don't judge them to quickly (Score:2)
As opposed to the upstanding Republicans? (Score:4, Informative)
Because the Republicans [wsws.org] would never stifle free-speech.
Before you point out that the Dems did more or less the same thing, I'm not even attempting to exonerate them. It's actually possible to see the flaws in both parties.
However, from my perception, the Republican track record does seem worse than the Democratic one. Many right-wingers like to talk about the shackles of political correctness, but have no problem with calling you anti-American if you point out that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.
Re:As opposed to the upstanding Republicans? (Score:2)
Saddam supports terrorism with funding to terrorists and payoffs to suicide bombers families.
Terrorism is a worldwide problem and support to terrorism in general does support the continuation of terrorism even when there is not a clear and direct link to any specific terrorist act.
Saddam, by his financial and other support (known terrorists were sheltered in Iraq) to terrorism in general fosters
I'm not crying for Saddam (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree he supported terrorists in other parts of the world, used gas on his own (Kurdish) people, and deserved no better treatment than we gave him. In short, he was a very, very bad man.
However, it would behoove us to remember what has happened in the past when we've taken it upon ourselves to "encourage" regime change [csmonitor.com].
Short version:
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Jesus Fscking Christ (Score:3, Informative)
For example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/katrina/story/0,16441,15 67841,00.html [guardian.co.uk]
Re:Take a good look... (Score:2)
Whomever labeled this as flamebait either doesn't understand the issue, moderates at random (the poster is correct in their insight),
or has just had their own political ox royally gored.