I did a policy paper a while ago that proposed the reason behind the demographic problems in Singapore (low birth rate, high outgoing workforce, high emigration, immigration quality) is the lack of ownership that the people (whether citizens or not) have with the country. That is due to a myriad of reasons, some are policy driven, some are indirectly policy driven, all are arguable depending on which set of dubious statistics you're talking about, but I am quite sure that:
A Singaporean's lack of pride in his own country and people adversely affects other Singaporeans' perception of Singapore, and also foreigners' perception
Cultural and national icons must come about with history and reason and pride attached. They are strengthened by the people's participation in their formation.
This is why I think that, feminist protests aside, the Singapore Girl is a better marketing icon for Singapore tourism than the Merlion (wait- the Mer-what?). Although it is a corporate creation - and hence carries a little obligatory tacky factor - and it is entirely not a desirable description of Singaporean women, it markets pride in the country's hospitality and service quality. Backed by the high international regard Singapore Airlines has managed to achieve, it is something Singaporeans can be proud of, especially when they take, say, North American airlines.
I have this theory that in general, in an authoritarian country, the patriotic actions of these agents inspire national pride in decreasing order:
People (common man, artists, celebrity, freedom fighter, culture) > Corporations > Government-linked entities and politicians
That's why I like this canadian beer commercial very much:
you pointed out a good observation there. well i guess there is also the effect of Singaporeans trying to carve out their own national pride by going against the ones carved for them. look at Talkingcock and Hossan Leong...
