The passing of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, Singapore’s most well known opposition politician, a week ago may not have been psychologically seismic enough to prompt a middle class Singaporean society to soul search, but it did offer an insight to how Singaporean institutions are simultaneously constructing and sanitising a man’s life for national memory.

Certainly, the manipulation of personal narratives by the state and its apparatuses is not new. It is a necessary nation-building process that constructs heroes and demons for citizens to revere and despise, hence creating clear perimeters for the identity of a nation. And to this end, the way the Singapore media and some members of the government have chosen to interpret the live and ideology of JBJ, as he is fondly referred to, is a reflection of how it sees opposition politics, Singapore society and ultimately, the Singapore nation.

Reading the numerous media reports of plaudits and memories that various prominent people had of JBJ and the way his death was covered, it is clear how the man is being constructed; as a fighter, a man of idealism and passion, one who never gave up no matter how insurmountable the obstacles or opponents were. Among the quotes from the national broadsheet The Straits Times were those from the dominant People’s Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament (MP), one of whom observed that “He was like the Chinese doll, the bu dao weng – you knock him down, he comes back, you knock him down, he comes back up again”. Another MP noted that “I have admiration for people like him, a person who never gives up, a person who suffered for his convictions, and who goes down fighting all the way”. As to why he needed to be knocked over and over again or go down fighting was expediently left out.

A columnist of the same newspaper noted that “when both your friends and political enemies use the same descriptions of you, you can be sure they are true. In Mr Jeyaretnam’s case, sincerity, tenacity and courage are words many have used to describe him.” Others include social justice, human rights, martyr, PAP hegemony but you don’t see them used in the media. In a way, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew’s silence so far has been the most honest reaction so far. The mutual dislike between the two men was real with MM Lee infamously promising to leave the other on ‘bended knee’. MM Lee’s lack of a condolence message may seem uncharitable to some but it is, at least, a dignified stance and more importantly, spares JBJ’s family and Singaporeans a public display of crocodile tears.

Of course, if the construction of JBJ is but a careful cherry-picking of the man’s beliefs and actions, then the persona of JBJ may be turning into an ideological site to fulfill a specific purpose. In Singaporean politics, despite the country’s economic success and material affluence, the one nagging concern amongst citizens and politicians alike has been the price of success. Political apathy, ignorance of national history, over-dependence on the state, crass materialism over idealism and so on, have been perennial tropes in countless public forums and conferences that delve into local politics. The flight of talented Singaporeans overseas, adding to the estimated 150,000 already abroad, is another side-effect of economic success.

JBJ has always been the embodiment of idealism. This embodiment has not always been a positive one. In fact, JBJ was often portrayed as naïve, idealistic and full of rhetoric against the more well-grounded, pragmatic, and dependable PAP. As the embodiment of idealism, JBJ was seen by the authorities as unsuitable for the technocratic demands of modern day governance. It was precisely because of his idealism and passion for what he believed in that he became a walking, talking reminder to Singaporeans to stay out of politics. As the embodiment of idealism, he was deemed politically irrelevant.

But now after his death, when response is no longer possible, this embodiment can be fashioned for the purpose of nation-building. It was never the case that JBJ was irrelevant, rather, he was inconvenient. However, now that the negative connotations that came with his idealism are purged, leaving only terribly opaque words like sincerity, tenacity and courage, the man can now be rehabilitated for national memory. We can now co-opt his idealism and passion for our own agenda.

And so we santise him. We speak of him as a fighter but not what he fought for – pluralist democracy, human rights and press freedom. We speak of his great struggles but not what he struggled against – PAP hegemony, authoritarianism, the use of punitive lawsuits in politics and so on. He is a fighter in a vacuum. He struggles against the unspoken. JBJ is well on his way to becoming an abstract museum artifact in the halls of our national memory.

All nation-building projects are exercises in cognitive dissonance on a grand scale. Cognitive dissonance comes about when one’s beliefs do not match reality, resulting in a modification of these personal beliefs because reality is harder to change than beliefs. And so too with nation-building, historical events and personalities cannot be totally erased but they can, and are, re-defined and re-interpreted to match the beliefs and values of dominant interests.

If this were to happen to JBJ, then Singapore’s loss would be aggravated. We would not only have lost the man but also his values. We would have allowed his life, his struggles, and his beliefs to be re-defined and re-interpreted by the very institutions he often confronted.