It seems that we have now been mandated to snoop on each other's private lives. On 18th January, Malacca Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam, backed the State's 4B Youth Movement's proposal to introduce "moral guardians" amongst youths in reporting "immoral activities". He said, "I don't see anything wrong with getting as many people as
possible to become the eyes and ears of the authorities if it can help." Sounds reasonable? If we were to witness someone's bag being snatched on the streets, it would be a boon if people would actually come forward and report what was seen. If we heard a domestic worker being abused by our neighbours, there would be a lot less flaunted violence if we took action. But would it be such a good idea if young people are encouraged to hang out with each other with an underlying agenda of turning each other in?

This really isn't all that alien. Remember the playground days, where there was always at least one kid who told on everyone else. The one child whom no one trusted because anything he saw could be used as incriminating evidence for demerit or toilet duties. Or the sibling that always told on his brothers and sisters, often with a satisfied grin in the background when the others got punished. Now, it appears that we are not only rekindling these annoying childhood memories into the first phase of adulthood, we are expanding them into every sphere of our lives.

How is this a bad idea? Number one, we are encouraging a lack of trust amongst young people. They are told that their peer group will now sneak up on them, listen to confidences or see their so-called moral discrepancies and expose them. Friends will have to be cautiously made and cliques will grow even tighter for fear of being told on. This will solidify boundaries and weaken their ability to form communities that are open to new people who may have alternative perspectives or life experiences. Making new and wider network of friends with different interests is a significant part of growing up. Learning about variegated experiences and exploration of new things are important for the social development of young adults.

The culture of peer surveillance enforced by this proposal impede the development of creativity, acceptance and tolerance in young adults. Who knows, the need to survive through the spirit of exclusivity policed through suspicion may even grow into cronyism in adulthood.

Note that this is a wariness fostered only between young people themselves. The 'Authorities' - whether they may be teachers, parents, leaders of the youth movement, police, religious departments or even the Chief Minister - who are primarily comprised of adults are exempted. According to this proposal, they are unquestionably principled. Should any 'immoral activities' be sighted, these adults can be trusted to do the 'Right Thing' and as such be told. Not only is this a fallacy, healthy criticism by young people formed through their diverse experiences are shed, and the only role available for them in decision-making is tale-telling. Not exactly a very constructive method to encourage inclusive participation or the development of accountable autonomy. Young leaders are nurtured to be incapable of making up their own minds on personal responsibility and consciousness in their own actions without first referring to an adult's point of view. Through this stultifying process, we cannot reasonably expect a new generation of new leaders who have the wisdom and capacity to judge between fair and unjust; something that ironically, organisations such as the Malacca 4B Youth Movement is trying to inculcate. That is point number two.

Next, exactly what constitutes 'immoral activities'? This is such a vague criteria that almost anything can be captured by it. Would a vegetarian consider eating beef in public spaces immoral? Would a peck on the cheek between friends constitute immorality? Would a game of Monopoly breach the moral code by verging on the principles of chance and capitalism? Terms as such can easily slide from easily recognisable crimes like theft and violence to whatever it is that suits the subjective rationalisation of a person, or even a group of individuals. When the policing is made through peers with no traceable system of accountability - not even a badge to signify adherence to deliberated standards of practice - then we can easily create an atmosphere of mass fear and distrust. Such contexts are conducive to the enforcement of values based on existing stereotypes since we customarily point fingers at those who are 'different from us'. This is not unlike the systematic discrimination faced by people of colour, particularly those with Muslim names, at the United States of America stemmed from hysteria over terrorism.

We have to remember that youth is a time of exploration, of the self, of community and of the ethics of social life. By reintroducing playground rules into real life as a solution to social issues, we are not only being myopic and puerile, we are being dangerously dismissive of the capacity of young adults to be responsible and thinking individuals. This is not the time to dress our young citizens up as mini-police officers blowing whistles, it is a time to demonstrate serious and committed efforts at building up a new generation of Malaysians who are not just 'kay pohs' and 'tell-tales', but subjects with intelligence, compassion and integrity.

Jaclyn Kee
23 January 2005

Talk Back to wao@wao.org.my
Fortnightly Column by WAO on Sunday Mail