First was this video being posted on Youtube.
Then Singaporeans cried out and make noise all over the net that 3 Brits bullied our old man. Is it really bully? The trishaw was really travelling too freaking slow for the Brits. And Mr Lee did not know they were unhappy that the trishaw was too slow. He only knew that the Brits were laughing happily on his trishaw, and he laughed along with them, saying “hap-pi!”
Those being ferried on a trishaw consitute to “bullying”?
If you look into the past, trishaw is a mode of transport commonly used by the rich. The trishaw was often driven by someone of lower social status then the passenger. Singapore Tourism Board retain this “trishaw” thing as a kind of tourism attraction. They see the trishaw as a form of Singapore historical culture that they can use to tout or exhibit to tourists. When tourists ride on the trishaw, it inevitably gives them a form of “higher” social status, makes them feel more superior than the “local natives”, a feeling that human being love to have to boast their ego. Isn’t it the same thing when Singaporeans visit more underdeveloped countries like Thailand, China, etc. They go there and ride on trishaw there powered by old man from those countries. The only difference is Thailand and China didn’t complain that we go there and “bully” their old man.
Shouldn’t Singaporeans use their brains and question whether trishaws should be taken out from Singapore altogether, instead of scolding the 3 Brits (something much easier to do, and which gives Singaporeans a false sense of righteousness they so need in such a mess up society).
However, trishaws cannot be removed. It drives Singapore’s Tourism. It gives old people job (and there will be more and more poor old people in the future, especially those who have retired and have not yet reach the golden age of 85). It preserves a form of historical culture.
While I certainly do not endores the Brit’s immature behavior (to which many Brits have commented were due to their education system), Singapore’s behavior with regards to this issue is shameful as well. Everyone wanting to have a say. Everyone wanting to shame those Brits. Everyone complaining and kao-peiing without even holding the issue inside their brains for a little more than 0 seconds.
The issue of not paying? Its easily explainable. Unlike Singapore where the consumers are ultimately the losers (lousy goods return policies etc), retail stores in countries like the UK and the USA have very good return policies that allows consumers to return goods they have bought but do not find to their satisfaction, most of the time with just a small token “re-stocking” fee. These 3 Brits rided on the trishaw, find it not to their satisfaction, and hence do not pay. By their standard, it is not wrong.
Although strong emotions immerge when watching the above video, it is sometime important to be clear headed and think through things.
This issue brings to shame 3 Brits. But looking at the immature response by many Singaporeans, it brings to shame the whole of Singapore.
Please listen to what uncle Lee has to say. He is not angry over the incident anymore. Why should other Singaporeans be? Unless they are very kpo, and still insist on showing their self delusional sense of false righteousness.
 (No Ratings Yet) |
Loading ...
Loading ...
lol talk about foreign talent, maybe time for us to move on our own?
WinsonKOH, move on our own? Poor uncle. Since you are near, help him, WinsonKOH.
‘Shouldn’t Singaporeans use their brains and question whether trishaws should be taken out from Singapore altogether…’
Let’s get the issue right. It’s not about the act of being ferried around in trishaws or being chauffered by the poor/elderly etc. It’s about the RESPECT given to anyone, including the trishaw man at your service. So removing the trade is really not the crux here. And probably you need to rethink who need to use their brains here.
Hundreds of people ride on the trishaws for various cultural, social, economic reasons. I don’t think it’s fair to make a generalization that it’s for the sake of superiority as you judgmentally put it. It could be a translation of your feelings, but you definitely can’t say that for me. And just a word of concern, I hope that your sense of ego has not burst on you.
Sorry dude, but I think the fact that we are surfacing this issue to the world is evident that we are ‘holding the issue inside (our)their brains for a little more than 0 seconds.’ It is not an everyday affair that an apathetic country like S’pore create an uproar over issues that matter to us. Only in silence would shame be cast on us all.
‘He is not angry over the incident anymore. Why should other Singaporeans be? Unless they are very kpo, and still insist on showing their self delusional sense of false righteousness.’
So if my deaf & mute friend gets insulted in the face, I should be oblivious cause he is not hurt in anyway? If by standing up for him is a ’self delusional sense of false righteousness’, what is the true sense?
Lastly, I’m aghast at the way you justified their act of not paying. Utterly speechless. Right, maybe I should stop paying for my UK cab/bus fares since they will never match up to MY standard.
Thanks for reading my humble blog. However, some things to point out.
You said, “It’s not about the act of being ferried around in trishaws or being chauffered by the poor/elderly etc. It’s about the RESPECT given to anyone, including the trishaw man at your service.”
I already said, “The trishaw was often driven by someone of lower social status than the passenger.”
Do you mean to say that the elderly are of lower social status? I never say that. Don’t put outrageous word in my mouth.
You said, “So removing the trade is really not the crux here. And probably you need to rethink who need to use their brains here.”
To which I already wrote, “However, trishaws cannot be removed.” And I stated reasons for that.
However, are you sure removing trishaws is not the crux here?
The thing is, if you are a good person, with moral and all that, would you even ride on a trishaw in a first place, no matter whether it is powered by a young man or old man. Its a form of transport that is powered by the brute strength of another human being. It is like riding on a horse carriage, but instead of a horse a human being is powering the cart. You approve of trishaw?
You said, “Hundreds of people ride on the trishaws for various cultural, social, economic reasons.”
This is overly vague. I can also say the same of anything.
“Hundreds of people visit Weikiat.NET for various cultural, social, economic reasons”.
“Hundreds of people pee for various cultural, social and econmic reasons.”
The above 2 sentences can also be easily justified.
You said, “And just a word of concern, I hope that your sense of ego has not burst on you.”
I’ve got a few pimples bursting on me before, but ego, no. And it is often well understood that a person who has problem winning an argument will resort to name calling, something that is totally uncalled for, uncivilised, and unconstructive.
You said, “Sorry dude, but I think the fact that we are surfacing this issue to the world is evident that we are ‘holding the issue inside (our)their brains for a little more than 0 seconds.’”
Yeah, I’m sure we have surfaced the issue. But once we have done the surfacing part, we should move on to the “fixing” part. Solve the problem. Or at least minimise it. But no. What Singaporeans are doing is to continue to make a big hoo-haa out of the whole issue. Does that help? No. It only helps to make those bloggers feel better. “Hey, I am part of this exciting bunch of bloggers shaming people who bully my fellow Singaporeans!” They think that way. The issue is surfaced. Enough is enough. No point shaming those brits any longer.
You said, “So if my deaf & mute friend gets insulted in the face, I should be oblivious cause he is not hurt in anyway? If by standing up for him is a ’self delusional sense of false righteousness’, what is the true sense?”
There is nothing wrong with standing up for him. But you didn’t make a good example. A better example would be, if my friend was injured by a man, but after that he is no longer angry and did not want to pursue the matter anymore, and just want to get on with pedalling his trishaw, should I stand up for him on his behalf? Obviously if you do, you are not respecting the wish of the victim. You are only trying to fulfill your own sense of delusional righteousness.
Finally, you said, “Lastly, I’m aghast at the way you justified their act of not paying. Utterly speechless. Right, maybe I should stop paying for my UK cab/bus fares since they will never match up to MY standard.”
I did say, “By their standard, it is not wrong.” I tried to understand and explain the reason why they did not pay. Which part in my entry did I say I endorse their not paying?
To end it off, using your language: Lastly, I’m aghast at your comment. Utterly speechless.
Dear Wei Kiat,
For someone who has spoken passionately against the likes of Wee Shu Min, I must say that I’m a little surprised, and frankly, quite disappointed at your blog entry.
The 3 Britons were, in my opinion, making fun of the fact that Uncle Lee couldn’t understand English very well - so they made unkind comments about Uncle Lee (which I wouldn’t further elaborate). And to top it off, they hopped onto a cab and refused to pay Uncle Lee a single cent (although this was refuted later). If this doesn’t constitute bullying - then I’d appreciate it if you could tell me what this is.
Assuming that each Brit weighs 70kgs, and the three of them would have had a combined weight of over 200kgs. I wonder, at this point of time, if a young chap like yourself would be able to ferry these three guys at say, 20km/h. I’m sure you’ll able to, since you’re serving the army. But Uncle Lee is 69 years old - he no longer holds the strength of a young chap. If your suggestion is “the trishaw was really travelling too freaking slow for the Brits”, I suggest that you apply a little compassion for our older folks, who aren’t as agile and strong as what they used to be.
I am rather lost when it comes to your argument about taking trishaws out of Singapore, but I’d like to clarify your misunderstandings. Firstly, back in the old days, trishaws weren’t only used commonly by the rich, they were a mode of transport for the poor as well. Trishaws in modern-day Singapore are simply a mode of transport for tourists to see the city in a slower pace, something that cannot be replaced by cars, trains or buses. The notion that Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese tourists are riding trishaws to boost their egos seem incomprehensible to me - because I have seen tourists that simply do not behave like this.
Back to your point about taking trishaws out of Singapore and how it drives our tourism. This has really nothing to do with Uncle Lee’s story. Uncle Lee’s story is about the working conditions and hardships of our elderly. In a society that is famous for being notoriously apathetic, I am glad to see so many people standing up for Uncle Lee.
I find that you’re confusing the term ‘return policy’ with a service that is provided by Uncle Lee. Firstly, there is a verbal agreement between the 3 Brits and Uncle Lee that they will pay him if he ferries them with his trishaw. That alone constitutes a contract. When Uncle Lee has completed his side of deal, it is only natural that he expects some form of consideration, and in this case, money. To say that Uncle Lee’s trishaw service isn’t up-to-par isn’t a good reason to invalidate a contract. It is as good as walking into a restaurant, eating the food, and refusing to pay just because the food sucks. Try doing that in UK and the States and see what happens. And in Uncle Lee’s case, the 3 Brits have clearly breached a contract, which is an offence under Singapore law.
To give you the benefit of the doubt, perhaps their actions could be justified by where they came from. But what really matters is where they are right now.
And to conclude that Singaporeans shouldn’t be kicking up a fuss just because Uncle Lee isn’t upset anymore is just - in my opinion - a terrible excuse. Perhaps Uncle Lee is deeply hurt, but he appears to be nonchalant about it? Perhaps there are other issues that are unknown to us? To borrow a piece of advice from Harper Lee, perhaps you would like to be in Uncle Lee’s shoes, walk around a little, and see how it feels like.
Uncle Lee’s story is a good wake-up call to Singaporeans of the problems that our elderly face. I’ll be really saddened if one day young Singaporeans like your good self stopped voicing out the issues they’re concerned with.
Then again, perhaps we’re already half-way there.
Perhaps you didn’t read well enough. But it should be my own fault for being so unclear… I’m making a dig at the incident. My tone when I agree or explain what the brits did was not my usual tone. Maybe I should sound a few percent more sacrastic.
Maybe I should write
“Then Singaporeans cried out and yelled all over the net like a man with his lower body chopped of by a screaming madman, that 3 stupid Brits bullied our wise old man. Do you really think it is JUST Bullying? The trishaw was really travelling too freaking slow for the Brits! Damn the old man! He should cycle faster to please the Brits! But it is not the old man’s fault for not knowing the Brits are too unhappy! He didn’t understand English! He only knew that the Brits were laughing happily on his trishaw, and he laughed along with them, saying “hap-pi!—
Also you interestingly left out the following quote:
“I certainly do not endores the Brit’s immature behavior.”
Trishaws aren’t use by the poor. Do you know what is poor? The poor walks.
You got bashed by a bully. You don’t want to think about it anymore. People around you keep fighting and making a big fuss for you. You like it? Only people who make the fuss like that because it serves their own sense of righteousness.
Lunch break now. Good bye. And welcome to my blog again:)
Dear Wei Kiat,
If your ‘usual tone’ can warrant two relatively dissatisfactory replies (from Jenz and myself), then I’m afraid you cannot expect your readers (especially new ones) to know what your ‘usual tone’ is, because in the context of your entire posting, you certainly do not seem to be ‘making a dig at the incident’. Of course, you’re completely entitled to your own definition of ‘my usual tone’.
My dad used to be a trishaw rider and my brother used to work for the National Archives of Singapore. They have both told me that the trishaw is a common form of transport for both rich and poor, and I would gladly appreciate it if you could tell me why you think otherwise. “The poor walks” is neither a valid nor substantial explanation.
If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that people shouldn’t speak up once the victim has expressed his views that he is not bothered by the incident any more - fair enough. But the irony of it all is that your good self has spoken up against those who had.
My apologies, the first sentence of my previous reply should read “If your ‘not-usual tone’ can warrant….”
The thing lies in how “poor” do you define as “poor”. But it is a very grey area where discussion won’t bring much fruit, so I’ll conceit here.
Also, notice that I am not refering to singaporeans who were merely “speaking up”. I was refering to”Everyone wanting to have a say. Everyone wanting to shame those Brits. Everyone complaining and kao-peiing without even holding the issue inside their brains for a little more than 0 seconds.”
I agree you do have a point there in some of the things you commented. But I still feel that while riding on a trishaw is not FOR a sense of superiority, it may give some of the passenger that kind of feeling, indirectly or directly. Couple that with the western’s opinion of us asians as the “weaker” race.. you get the video above.
Weikiat, I think it’s interesting that you have a different perspective. You think Singaporeans who got heated up and are standing up for the uncle are being kaypo are emotional. You would be more practical and go for the solution: eliminate the trishaw uncles - symbol of a colonial past, give Singaporeans back our pride. I can understand your perspective. I’d like to offer another perspective, which is standing from the angle of the trishaw uncle. Nothing to do with us versus anybody else. I’ve stood at the clarke quay taxi stand before (yep you know…the long queues) and actually recognize this uncle. He and his colleagues work really hard. And incidentally, being treated by potential Western/foreign customers with less than the respect we’d like to see accorded to a fellow Singaporean, is part of the job. I’d observed how tourists tried to bargain. Can’t blame them. We DO do it ourselves when we travel eh? Have done it plenty of times. We feel bad to see this here but how are the tourists to know, it is not part of our culture to bargain for transport? Ask the cab uncles too (much higher class, especially considering the recent price hikes) - they encounter this all the time too. What I am trying to say is, for the trishaw uncle, this is a JOB. He makes his LIVING doing this, whatever difficulties he may face, however his joints ache, however he struggles to communicate with his customers. JUST AS WE face stress in our ‘higher class’ jobs. In this case, his customers were obnoxious. But Let us all make peace. Let the uncle get on with his job.