Multicultural societies must come together like batik, not a patchwork quilt: Tharman

SINGAPORE – The fabric of a multicultural society must be like a piece of batik – a single fabric crafted by different hands to create a larger motif of many colours, President Tharman Shanmugaratnam said on June 24.

In contrast, many societies see multiculturalism as a quilt of different patches stitched together, he said. But in times of stress, when economic insecurity or polarising forces intensify, the stitches weaken and the quilt is easily forced apart.

Mr Tharman has often used the quilt analogy when speaking on multiculturalism. He added the batik twist in his opening address at the three-day International Conference on Cohesive Societies held at Raffles City Convention Centre, where batik was the preferred attire of many audience members.

“We have to weave threads of different colours, even different textures, into a single tapestry – or involve many artisans in making a single fabric... that creates a larger motif of a nation with many strands and many histories, but at one with itself,” he said.

More than 1,000 people, including policymakers and young leaders from over 50 countries, attended the conference organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies and supported by the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth.

The conference was first held in 2019 to provide an international platform for interfaith and multicultural dialogue, and for participants to exchange ideas and develop solutions to create cohesive and resilient multicultural societies.

Mr Tharman’s address focused on reasons for division across the world while highlighting areas that societies should work on to nurture multiculturalism.

He first provided context, noting that enthusiasm for multiculturalism is waning and social cohesion is weakening worldwide.

No political system can guarantee that a government or people will prioritise integration of different cultures, and recent evidence suggests the opposite – people are moving away from moderate tendencies towards more polarising behaviour, views and politics, he said.

“Shared values and belief in a common future do not come naturally, and there are always countervailing sentiments below the surface. Multicultural societies must therefore be actively woven,” he said.

Advancing political polarisation is weakening the moderate middle ground and fuelling the rise of extremes, especially the radical right, said Mr Tharman.

A startling trend observed in the last decade is the widening social and political divide between the better educated and the less, as well as those who live in the countryside and those who live in cities.

“What is most worrying is the way in which culture and identity is being injected into normal contentions over economic issues,” he said.

Economic insecurity has converted identity and culture into a more virulent and more divisive political tool, he added.

There are several deep forces behind the growing division, said Mr Tharman.

First, the failure to control immigration and integrate immigrants, as seen in Europe.

Second, the polarising effects of a fragmented media landscape and social media algorithms.

While social media empowers many voices and frees access to information, much of it is now shaped by algorithms run by large technology companies, which have a polarising effect, said Mr Tharman.

These algorithms offer a feed of stories that aligns with an individual’s ideological preferences and strengthens them. Tech firms also have an incentive to maximise attention by propagating negative messages, he added.

The third force contributing to division is the growing isolation in how people live their lives, especially in advanced countries.

People are living more on their own and interacting less with neighbours who would have helped them to understand differences and accept disagreements.

“Societies can advance economically whilst regressing socially,” said Mr Tharman.

Weaving a multicultural society requires sensible guard rails to prevent extremism and self-reinforcing polarisation, while allowing and encouraging differences in views, he said.

This must begin from education, the most powerful tool available to integrate people, he added.

Apart from allowing for social mixing, effective education can also uplift people of all backgrounds, said Mr Tharman.

Without evidence that people can get ahead on their merits – with necessary support for those who start from behind – it will be difficult to sustain a sense of togetherness, he added.

“Education systems must be effective in uplifting every individual and every group. And I must say that is what we put great effort into, in Singapore,” he said.

Another area is urban design to prevent ethnically or socially defined enclaves.

He cited Singapore’s public housing estates where more than 75 per cent of the population live, with a mix of ethnicities and income groups in every block.

“It is not just about housing. It is (also) about the facilities for recreation, for learning, for interaction, for morning qigong, a whole set of activities that bring people together,” he said.

“Common spaces in every neighbourhood, where you can develop your skills in a futsal court or watch others, or try out a new dance together. It is not just housing, it is an estate for social life.”

While not every society can replicate what Singapore has done, it is still important to provide public spaces in societies with existing segregated neighbourhoods, he added.

The third area to work on is that of media fragmentation and social media algorithms, which Mr Tharman characterised as “one of the most complex”.

Mr Tharman noted that the world is nowhere near agreement on the regulation of social media platforms, though advances have been made.

“It requires bold thinking. Both government and civil society have to actively work together, and with the tech companies that run the largest social media platforms, to make democracy safer and more sustainable,” he said.

He cited the European Union’s new Digital Services Act as a good example of how this can be done. The Act requires social media platforms to be accountable for content, such as the quick removal of hate speech. Singapore and Australia are also doing similarly.

While some may say this is over-regulation – it is more regulation than big tech players are used to – an unregulated media landscape will only see democracy gradually unravel, Mr Tharman said.

Established news media will also have to show journalism that is built on accuracy and transparency, he said.

They have to separate news from opinion, and when they publish opinion, they should provide different perspectives for people to assess, he added.

While he would not promote Singapore media as a model for the world, he pointed out that the mainstream media here is by far the largest chosen source of news among citizens, among many alternatives.

That is critical, as it keeps that shared reality and common framework of facts for citizens, said Mr Tharman.

Fourth, society must develop a culture of respect and solidarity that comes from everyday actions and not just governments and politicians. Civil society, educators, religious and community leaders and individuals also have to pitch in, he said.

Each society must aim to build a community of respect, which goes to the heart of social cohesion and multiculturalism, said Mr Tharman.

Respect is a source of upliftment as a society, he said.

“We need something more intrinsic to upliftment, we need the motivation that drives people to strive to overcome difficulties and to do their best. And the respect we lend each other is the most powerful source of motivation.”