I wonder, could CCS’s Freudian slip be our Freudian slip?
But the difference is that in that supposed closed-door session, which went viral due to a leak, it was one where CCS said, “I do not mince my words when presenting hard truths and trade-offs.” It was more of a no-holds-barred speak rather than a Freudian slip.
Some of us are however pissed with him because a Minister of Parliament, elected by the people and also a former army general shouldn’t act the way he did in the SCCCI meeting, closed-door or open, right?
Why should there be a gap between his public and private personas? Shouldn’t we be the same regardless, at all times?
Where is the decorum? Where is the protocol? Where is the civility?
Calling some Singaporeans “idiots”? Telling others their behaviour “sia suay” us when they use alcohol swabs to clean tables, rushing to hoard toilet paper and instant noodles, and emptying condom shelves?
Actually, at mediation, a typical closed-door session, divorcing couples or splitting business partners do it all the time. It is meant to be off-the-record because you can’t solve issues if you only deal with the cold-hard facts, without addressing the hot-burning emotions behind it.
And the only way to solve the impasse is to let the parties ventilate, and at times, be brutally candid in the hope of unraveling their true motives, their hidden hurts, pent-up frustrations and even prejudices, inadequacies and envy.
Most times, you deal directly with the underlying emotions (with no mincing of words) and the knots of the issues will naturally untie themselves.
At this point, I recall Tom Cruise pushing Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men” to the emotional knife-edge with this memorable phrase, “You can’t handle the truth!”
Admittedly, that SCCI meeting, no doubt closed-door, is no courtroom drama, or intense divorce mediation. Neither is CCS Tom Cruise (just to be clear).
But we deal with Jack-Nicholson type all the time. People who always get on our nerves. People who insist they are always right, and make sure you agree with them. People who are natural-born jerks. People who contribute little but claim the most, if not all. People who think the world spins around them, including the sun, moon and stars all doing a synchronised Fred Astaire.
And those who hoard at such times, those who jack up prices to make a hefty profit at society’s expense, and those who think they have done nothing shameful, fall right smack into the category that Tom Cruise or CCS is warning us about.
For Tom (in the movie), it is a fight for the integrity of the truth. For CCS, it is the fight for the unity of a nation.
The scene or setting may be different, one closed-door, the other open court, yet the intention or aim is the same. Both share the same ventilation or frustration, that is, about the exasperation of dealing with, well, idiots.
Nevertheless, I can picture CCS in public taking a different form of speech, but the substance of it is in no way different.
For example, instead of describing them as “idiots”, he might say they are socially irresponsible. And instead of saying “sia suay”, he might say “it is a regrettable sight” or “it’s embarrassing” or even “shameful”.
Yes, the setting is different, and so is the ventilation and candidness, leaving the remnant of truth unchanged. Mind you, colloquialism or euphemisms should not erode or undermine the honest truth of the message that rides on it. It just makes it more palatable or digestible to selected audience.
The issue with some of us is that we shoot the messenger we dislike and throw his body together with his message into the sea.
So, one shouldn’t be guilty of hypocrisy if he is merely calling a spade a spade, or a rotten apple a rotten apple, even if the kitchen knife he uses to cut the apple with is more blunt in one occasion than another.
When a situation warrants trust, you offer trust by speaking your mind. Not spewing hate speech, but delivering hard truths.
The betrayal therefore rests with the leaker, and not the one who confided with sincerity, frankness and urgency. Now, I am no PAP supporter, but not everything they say or do must unthinkingly attract our unreserved criticism.
And I know we all expect our leaders to be politically correct, for that is the liberal mindset of an enlightened politician.
But at times, it is not unexpected, or even surprising, for some of us to take a much-needed vacation from it, to share our gripe and frustrations in a secluded chalet of trusted friends, in the hope that the catharsis-like rant might release our soul from the emotional gridlock and offer us fresh perspective to move forward as one spirit to tackle the issue with heart and soul.
Ps: we bitch because we care...some just bitch.
No comments:
Post a Comment