Paul Chu

Using the post-colonial case study of Singapore, this paper examines the intersection of migration and multiculturalism to ask why there has been increased racist and xenophobic discourse when commenting on social issues involving migrants. The study method involves secondary research from a range of printed and online sources, supplemented by six qualitative interviews with first-generation migrants. I focused on the state’s “corporatist” multiculturalism, specifically through the race-categorizing Chinese-Indian-Malay-Other (CMIO) model. I identified three tenets of the CMIO model that contributed to racial harmony in Singapore: 1) the depoliticization of race/ethnicity, 2) a powerful and authoritative government that is able to effectively influence its people ideologically and 3) the principle of egalitarianism across all ethnic groups. However, the unprecedented speed and scale of migration since 2005, and the increasing dissonance between the Singaporean government and its people, have weakened the efficacy of the three tenets in maintaining racial harmony. Consequently, the paper provides policy implications and echoes the call for “adaptive governance”. The theoretical implication of this paper is the need to incorporate case-specific and updated socio-cultural, historical and political contexts for discourse on multiculturalism, such as how the state influences the relationship between the migrant and the citizen.