Keep Calm and Carry On

It was with a certain amount of bemusement with which I observed a certain Internet war spark off recently in sunny Singapore.

Shrey Bhargava, an aspiring actor, wrote a post on Facebook detailing his racist treatment during an audition for upcoming Singapore movie Ah Boys To Men 4. This was soon rebutted by our very own Xiaxue, Singapore's foremost influencer (a fancy douchebaggy word for "blogger") with a colorful series of posts that dissected Shrey's lamentations. Things heated up, escalating quickly, with name-calling and personal attacks abounding from both sides.

The minorities (Malays, Indians, Eurasians)  will invariably tell you that the majority (Chinese) did most of it (some might even claim that only the majority were behaving badly), and the majority will tell you that the minorities started it first. All rubbish. We're big boys and girls - whatever you do, own it.

Things came to a head when someone made a police report against Shrey. Now that was uncalled for.

Are Singaporeans racist? Why, sure we are. Perhaps not overtly, and I like to think that we've made progress as a nation since the dark days our Hokkien and Teochew forefathers duked it out on the docks. We might be guilty of "casual racism", whatever the hell that means. The majority might be guilty of innumerable microaggressions towards the minorities, and unfair race-based bias. I'd even venture to say that the minorities are just as capable of being racist as the majority. Some seem to be against racism only when it's being directed at them.

I noticed some trends during this war. Four main groups came out to play.

The minorities, those feeling outraged at yet another instance of racism in Singapore, railed bitterly and passionately about "majority privilege" and how the Chinese were "trying to put the uppity Indian back in his place".

The majority decided that Shrey was whiny and unprofessional (I don't actually disagree there), and needed to get over himself. I'm pretty sure I recall seeing personal attacks and racial slurs being thrown around. Like apunehneh, kelingkia, etc. Seriously, guys? This is 2017. Don't you feel stupid using those words?

A certain segment of Chinese were "woke" (again, another douchebaggy term) and decided that they should use their majority privilege to defend the minorities and wag their cyber-fingers at how their fellow Chinese were behaving.

And the last segment were just watching this all unfold (and undoubtedly munching on the proverbial popcorn), occasionally making a wisecrack here and there when the temptation got too strong, but staying out of it for the most part. Yep, that sounds like me all right.

Moral of the story? Let me put it this way. Here's an acronym for you: Let's Understand, Most People Are Ridiculous. If LUMPAR sounds suspiciously like the Hokkien term for scrotum, that's not a coincidence.

Chill, baby, chill

But that's neither here nor there. This isn't about debating who's more guilty of being racist. Screw that - we all are. It's about learning to stay chill on the Internet - whether it's on Facebook, WhatsApp or Twitter.

I'm only using this recent case as an example. There have been numerous other flame wars in recent memory - Trump supporters vs Clinton supporters (though I fail to see why Singaporeans think their opinion as to who would be a better US President is so goddamn important when none of us get to vote), LGBTQ vs "Traditional Asian Values" (boy, we're really piling on the douchebaggy terms today, aren't we?)...

There are certain things you might want to bear in mind if you want to remain chill on the Internet.

Having the last word is overrated

Some guys just can't let it go. They need to have the last word, hammer the other party into submission. For what? Dude, this is the Internet. There is no gain. Most of you have jobs, families and very real life struggles. What does winning at a pissing contest do for you?

Learn to walk away. Communication has changed in the last decade. Now, to get a message across, you can do so instantly without needing to see the other person face-to-face. Is that a good thing? Not always. Instant replies means that the rate in which you deliver inflammatory content also goes up, without giving you time to vet your own vitriol. That's bad, very bad. Being behind a computer screen also means the probability of getting punched in the face for saying something stupid goes down to zero percent. No immediate consequences - always a bad thing.

When Facebook notifies you that someone has replied to your post, and from prior experience you know that this person's remarks are likely to be snarky, insulting and utterly useless except to get a rise out of you, the most sensible thing you can do is not reply. No, wait, scratch that. The most sensible thing you can do is not even read it!

Ostrich behavior.

What, you think that this sounds cowardly? You think this sounds like ostrich behavior? No, it isn't. Blocking and unfriending is way more extreme. Blocking someone denies him the opportunity to speak his mind. That's just not right. People should be allowed to speak their minds. But you don't have to grant them an audience. Accord them the right to speak their mind and at the same time, exercise your right not to read their drivel while getting the fuck on with your life. I've had people single me out in WhatsApp chat groups for verbal abuse before. Do I respond? No, I turn off WhatsApp and play a few rounds of One Man Army: Epic Warrior. When people eventually calm down, they tend to understand how ridiculous they looked moments before.

There's no need to belabor the point. Let it go.

Anger is a barrier to effective communication

Regarding the Shrey Fray (as I like to call it), I had the dubious pleasure of having an Eurasian friend scream at me over WhatsApp regarding this incident.

Because this sends the message to Non chinese that we cannot even talk about race issues without you chinese turning around and putting us in our place despite us having a lifetime of being on the receiving end of your "know your place" put downs

Whoa, hold up. "You Chinese?" That sounded suspiciously racist. I thought this guy was against racism?

But see, here's the thing. People say stupid shit and make utter fucking fools of themselves when they're angry. It's one of the unshakeable laws of the universe. Just because someone is being stupid doesn't mean you need to join them.

Anger is a barrier to
effective communication.

Strong emotion is listed as one of the barriers to effective communication. I didn't make that shit up; if you'd gone through Polytechnic education, it's part of Communication Skills 101. Someone who is angry (not even necessarily with you)  isn't likely in the right frame of mind to listen to your calm, logical and rational analysis as to why his or her anger is misdirected. Stop talking; you're wasting your time and probably making that person even angrier.

Anger can be helpful if channeled productively. Anger vented over the Internet is mostly impotent rage. (Face it, if you had any power to change the situation that was angering you, you'd be doing it instead of raving on the Internet, right?) And when vessels of impotent rage collide, shit happens. Don't be one of those vessels. It helps no one, least of all yourself.

Just because you have the right, doesn't mean you should

People sometimes conflate the right to do something, with the necessity of such an action. Do not make that mistake. I have the right to sit in my bamboo rocking chair and smoke till my lungs bleed. I have the right to eat whatever crap I want and turn into Jabba The Hutt. I have the right to fantasize about Angelina Jolie 24 hours a day until my hand (and probably my dick) falls off. Do I recommend any of those courses of action? No, I most certainly do not.

Mama mia.

Did Shrey Bhargava have the right to voice his concerns in that Facebook post, however whiny he sounded? Of course. Did people have the right to respond, however nastily? Sure. Were other people perfectly within their rights in responding just as nastily? Without a doubt. Did the lamer who made that police report have the right to do so? Pains me to say it, but yes. Everyone was within their legal rights. And that's where the problem lies. Singapore's laws say you can do those things - it doesn't follow that you should do them.

Refer to the above incident again with my Eurasian friend. Did he make a racist remark while railing against racism? Sure. Did I have the right to be offended? Undoubtedly. Could I be blamed for wanting to respond in kind? Probably not.

But did I take offense? Did I escalate the situation with a few choice remarks of my own? Oh hell, no.

Look, I'm not claiming to be all mature and shit. I didn't escalate the situation not because I felt I owed him, or because I felt I deserved it, or even because I valued this friendship too much.

It was for a far simpler reason.

In six months, I will turn 40 and officially be a senior citizen. This is beneath me. I had every right to be upset - I just had neither the time nor the inclination. Besides, at my age, mustering anything stronger than mild annoyance is a bit of a challenge.

Chill out, dudes!

This is only the Internet. Your lives are more than that. Much, much more.

Stay cool. It'll preserve your shrey-nity. (heh heh)
T___T