Student - not WP - Calls LKY a DESPOT
-
hey running dog its the ppl's right to ask questions. you like to keep quiet wag your tail doesnt mean other ppl cannot ask questions.Originally posted by Naraku:so anyone planning to pay for the website unless you planned to host it on geocities
-
Pap pays lor...Originally posted by Naraku:so anyone planning to pay for the website unless you planned to host it on geocities -
The PAP always asks for more opinions...asking for pple to speak up...
When we say things that are critical of the government's policies, we will be asked to form a political party to fight for our rights... PAP juz cant accept pple's views
-
why, having problems accept other people's opinion, is it! can't even let others say what in their mind
By the way, did I stop jamie to ask question, all i want is more actions from him, that all.
Originally posted by crazy monkey:hey running dog its the ppl's right to ask questions. you like to keep quiet wag your tail doesnt mean other ppl cannot ask questions. -
How do want want Jaime to take action??? Unless we join him to form a party alh.... Then you become Minister for Communications, I become the Minister of $$$Finance$$$ and Crazy Monkey become Minister of Zoo and so on....Originally posted by Naraku:why, having problems accept other people's opinion, is it! can't even let others say what in their mind
By the way, did I stop jamie to ask question, all i want is more actions from him, that all.
-
the old fox lee is said to be a political animal... say say is ok, but u action only u die.
anyway, anyone saw the central MM Lee talk? what did they say? i missed it -
There is too much talk & no/little constructive action. We need to see the progressive result/action.
What is the exact objective/aim of this MINISTERIAL FORUM? Anyone knows? -
To let the people know whos in-charge...Originally posted by thinker:There is too much talk & no/little constructive action. We need to see the progressive result/action.
What is the exact objective/aim of this MINISTERIAL FORUM? Anyone knows? -
The PAP will say a lot of nonsense about "setting up your own party" and "be independent" etc etc etc...but their actions make them look like hypocritics. LKY record is there for judgment.Originally posted by Flashgalaxy:To let the people know whos in-charge...
You just won't know how he puts down his opponents either thru the ISA or defamation suits. -
Didn't know that Lao Lee had to fight communism. Didn't know that the late Mr Lim Chin Siong the founder Secretary General of PAP was a communist.Originally posted by sgdiehard:It is true that there is "a need for less government control"? most people will say yes.
It is true that even the "most enlightened despot" could turn into a tyrant if his powers were unchecked? absolutely YES.
I respect this undergrad for his guts to make that statement to LKY.
Did he have to challenge a young undergrad to "stake" his life??
Firstly, LKY did not go into politics as an undergrad. Secondly, he was fighting against communism and the angmoh colonial masters who were outsiders, so there were risks to his life. Now we are talking about improving the system among singaporeans, why talk about "staking" life? why need to be so defensive, sigh.....
If LKY could just laugh and asked, "young man, why did you call me a despot?" he would gain respect from me.
sigh, lou lee really lou liao..... -
Do you know lao lee's origin from what party??? Why he had to escape from Malaysia to singapore during midnight?Originally posted by poon pee pee:Didn't know that Lao Lee had to fight communism. Didn't know that the late Mr Lim Chin Siong the founder Secretary General of PAP was a communist. -
He formed PAP with a few friends. He was not in any party before that. He started off in politics by fighting for fair postman pay (as a lawyer) back during the days when white postmans earns much more (10 times more if I remember correctly) than locals by just being white.Originally posted by Lowclassman:Do you know lao lee's origin from what party??? Why he had to escape from Malaysia to singapore during midnight?
I cannot recall reading any incident of an escape from Malaysia to Singapore during midnight. -
Singaporeans have to realize that in order to get the Government to listen to them, they have to place pressure on the Govt.
Where does pressure on the Government come from?
It comes from Parliament if Parliament does its duty of checking on the Government.
The problem in Singapore is that PAP has an overwhelming majority in parliament for any checking to be effective.
The PAP MPs in questioning cabinet ministers are essentially questioning their party superiors. Speak for your constituents against your bosses? Can there be a conflict of interest over here?
Recall: Tan Soo Khoon had to apologize to then DPM Lee for certain things raised in Parliament.
This is why there has to be multiple parties in parliament for there to be purposeful questioning and checking of the Government by holding the cabinet accountable to answer the questions posed by the representatives of the people.
What MM merely did was to remind Jamie Han gently that he has the right to challenge if he wants to, and that is, if he dares to. MM in doing so has in a glance evaluated that this young man over here may talk but when called upon to face a PAP candidate on nomination day, he does not have the mettle to rise to the occasion.
For Jamie Han's fans and admirers, let it be known that i have nothing against him and i hope to be proven wrong about him as well. For there are many who will talk but few who will move. For those good with just talking and calling names, i know many. FYI, the people i know will say worse things about MM than Jamie Han.
Imagine this scenario:
An aging boxer, clear past his prime, wearing his title belt steps into the empty circle the crowd has formed around. He flings off his champion's cape aside just like he used to do so during his heyday. He scans the crowd waiting for the challenger.
No one steps forward.
From the crowd of spectators, a rash and rude young man shouts from the top of his voice that it is about time the boxer should retire.
The boxer raises his glove to indicate that he would receive the challenge. The crowd holds its breath. The young man falls silent. Dares not step forward.
No one steps forward.
After an uneasy silence. the crowd, ironically, turns around to cheer the little brat who had done nothing but merely shouted his comments.
The champion remains the champion, albeit a little older. The boy remains a boy.
Except for a little episode of public entertainment and rousing of the crowd.
Nothing has changed.
We can talk and curse until the cows come home but
Nothing is going to change if, on each and every nomination day, the PAP candidates go unchallenged
Nothing is going to change if, even the PAP candidate is challenged, the people choose to give the PAP their vote out of fear or whatever reason.
When a seemingly unpopular leader throws a challenge to the disgruntled to pick up the gauntlet and nobody dares to do so. Do you not think that the leader has proven why he still stands there?
Yet the mere commentator draws applause and admiration from the crowd??!!
This was the case with author Catherine Lim, partly so for Ngaim Tong Dow and whether it will be so for our Jamie Han, it remains to be seen.
Has our peopleÂ’s political will degenerated to the point that we dare not even practice the few remaining rights which defines our citizenship in this nation?
1. The right to speak up and be heard – something out of the ordinary?
2. the right to vote and to pressure the Govt. with your vote – is denied time and time again by tactics that are condoned by the people themselves.
3. the right to challenge – which few people dare to take.
At the end of the day the boxer retains his title, his champion status. Nobody could really complain about that cos they actually let it all happen unchallenged.
Woe betides the day that on the battlefield, the critics and sideline commentators get heralded as heroes and icons whilst the soldiers who fought it out are overlooked. -
talk so much so wat have you done ? at least jamie han have the guts to challenge LKY in public. do you dare to do so ?Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Singaporeans have to realize that in order to get the Government to listen to them, they have to place pressure on the Govt.
Where does pressure on the Government come from?
It comes from Parliament if Parliament does its duty of checking on the Government.
The problem in Singapore is that PAP has an overwhelming majority in parliament for any checking to be effective.
The PAP MPs in questioning cabinet ministers are essentially questioning their party superiors. Speak for your constituents against your bosses? Can there be a conflict of interest over here?
Recall: Tan Soo Khoon had to apologize to then DPM Lee for certain things raised in Parliament.
This is why there has to be multiple parties in parliament for there to be purposeful questioning and checking of the Government by holding the cabinet accountable to answer the questions posed by the representatives of the people.
What MM merely did was to remind Jamie Han gently that he has the right to challenge if he wants to, and that is, if he dares to. MM in doing so has in a glance evaluated that this young man over here may talk but when called upon to face a PAP candidate on nomination day, he does not have the mettle to rise to the occasion.
For Jamie Han's fans and admirers, let it be known that i have nothing against him and i hope to be proven wrong about him as well. For there are many who will talk but few who will move. For those good with just talking and calling names, i know many. FYI, the people i know will say worse things about MM than Jamie Han.
Imagine this scenario:
An aging boxer, clear past his prime, wearing his title belt steps into the empty circle the crowd has formed around. He flings off his champion's cape aside just like he used to do so during his heyday. He scans the crowd waiting for the challenger.
No one steps forward.
From the crowd of spectators, a rash and rude young man shouts from the top of his voice that it is about time the boxer should retire.
The boxer raises his glove to indicate that he would receive the challenge. The crowd holds its breath. The young man falls silent. Dares not step forward.
No one steps forward.
After an uneasy silence. the crowd, ironically, turns around to cheer the little brat who had done nothing but merely shouted his comments.
The champion remains the champion, albeit a little older. The boy remains a boy.
Except for a little episode of public entertainment and rousing of the crowd.
Nothing has changed.
We can talk and curse until the cows come home but
Nothing is going to change if, on each and every nomination day, the PAP candidates go unchallenged
Nothing is going to change if, even the PAP candidate is challenged, the people choose to give the PAP their vote out of fear or whatever reason.
When a seemingly unpopular leader throws a challenge to the disgruntled to pick up the gauntlet and nobody dares to do so. Do you not think that the leader has proven why he still stands there?
Yet the mere commentator draws applause and admiration from the crowd??!!
This was the case with author Catherine Lim, partly so for Ngaim Tong Dow and whether it will be so for our Jamie Han, it remains to be seen.
Has our peopleÂ’s political will degenerated to the point that we dare not even practice the few remaining rights which defines our citizenship in this nation?
1. The right to speak up and be heard – something out of the ordinary?
2. the right to vote and to pressure the Govt. with your vote – is denied time and time again by tactics that are condoned by the people themselves.
3. the right to challenge – which few people dare to take.
At the end of the day the boxer retains his title, his champion status. Nobody could really complain about that cos they actually let it all happen unchallenged.
Woe betides the day that on the battlefield, the critics and sideline commentators get heralded as heroes and icons whilst the soldiers who fought it out are overlooked. -
The problem is not so simple as some people have suggested. It is not a matter of challenging anyone to walk the talk or stand tall. Not many people are that tall.Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Singaporeans have to realize that in order to get the Government to listen to them, they have to place pressure on the Govt.
Where does pressure on the Government come from?
It comes from Parliament if Parliament does its duty of checking on the Government.
The problem in Singapore is that PAP has an overwhelming majority in parliament for any checking to be effective.
The PAP MPs in questioning cabinet ministers are essentially questioning their party superiors. Speak for your constituents against your bosses? Can there be a conflict of interest over here?
Recall: Tan Soo Khoon had to apologize to then DPM Lee for certain things raised in Parliament.
This is why there has to be multiple parties in parliament for there to be purposeful questioning and checking of the Government by holding the cabinet accountable to answer the questions posed by the representatives of the people.
What MM merely did was to remind Jamie Han gently that he has the right to challenge if he wants to, and that is, if he dares to. MM in doing so has in a glance evaluated that this young man over here may talk but when called upon to face a PAP candidate on nomination day, he does not have the mettle to rise to the occasion.
For Jamie Han's fans and admirers, let it be known that i have nothing against him and i hope to be proven wrong about him as well. For there are many who will talk but few who will move. For those good with just talking and calling names, i know many. FYI, the people i know will say worse things about MM than Jamie Han.
Imagine this scenario:
An aging boxer, clear past his prime, wearing his title belt steps into the empty circle the crowd has formed around. He flings off his champion's cape aside just like he used to do so during his heyday. He scans the crowd waiting for the challenger.
No one steps forward.
From the crowd of spectators, a rash and rude young man shouts from the top of his voice that it is about time the boxer should retire.
The boxer raises his glove to indicate that he would receive the challenge. The crowd holds its breath. The young man falls silent. Dares not step forward.
No one steps forward.
After an uneasy silence. the crowd, ironically, turns around to cheer the little brat who had done nothing but merely shouted his comments.
The champion remains the champion, albeit a little older. The boy remains a boy.
Except for a little episode of public entertainment and rousing of the crowd.
Nothing has changed.
We can talk and curse until the cows come home but
Nothing is going to change if, on each and every nomination day, the PAP candidates go unchallenged
Nothing is going to change if, even the PAP candidate is challenged, the people choose to give the PAP their vote out of fear or whatever reason.
When a seemingly unpopular leader throws a challenge to the disgruntled to pick up the gauntlet and nobody dares to do so. Do you not think that the leader has proven why he still stands there?
Yet the mere commentator draws applause and admiration from the crowd??!!
This was the case with author Catherine Lim, partly so for Ngaim Tong Dow and whether it will be so for our Jamie Han, it remains to be seen.
Has our peopleÂ’s political will degenerated to the point that we dare not even practice the few remaining rights which defines our citizenship in this nation?
1. The right to speak up and be heard – something out of the ordinary?
2. the right to vote and to pressure the Govt. with your vote – is denied time and time again by tactics that are condoned by the people themselves.
3. the right to challenge – which few people dare to take.
At the end of the day the boxer retains his title, his champion status. Nobody could really complain about that cos they actually let it all happen unchallenged.
Woe betides the day that on the battlefield, the critics and sideline commentators get heralded as heroes and icons whilst the soldiers who fought it out are overlooked.
Jamie Han has spoken up whereas many are aggravating the situation of autocracy by singing praises only to postpone solutions or change to deep-rooted problems.
An MP has remarked that she found many youths lacking directions and are confused. I agree with this observation. They do not know what to do about the problems. They cannot speak up or lack the courage to speak up and yet they do not want others to speak on their behalf.
This is why I say it is not a matter of walking the talk. It is more important to have a group of people who are committed and passinate for change through sharing of the same cause. Go and find that group of people rather than talking to anyone in forum as many of them may be rather confused when anyone ask them about problems or to join your cause. -
If walking the talk is not the key to change how then does the points on democracy apply to help change the situation?Originally posted by robertteh:The problem is not so simple as some people have suggested. It is not a matter of challenging anyone to walk the talk or stand tall. Not many people are that tall.
Jamie Han has spoken up whereas many are aggravating the situation of autocracy by singing praises only to postpone solutions or change to deep-rooted problems.
An MP has remarked that she found many youths lacking directions and are confused. I agree with this observation. They do not know what to do about the problems. They cannot speak up or lack the courage to speak up and yet they do not want others to speak on their behalf.
This is why I say it is not a matter of walking the talk. It is more important to have a group of people who are committed and passinate for change through sharing of the same cause. Go and find that group of people rather than talking to anyone in forum as many of them may be rather confused when anyone ask them about problems or to join your cause.
How do you evoke change by "sharing of the same cause"?
How are the people sharing the same cause supposed to be? Talk only or walk the talk?
The truly passionate ones are few and far between.
Nets must be cast wide.
Forums are not the only pond but they cannot be ignored. -
Is your idea of a good politician someone who will call others names?Originally posted by crazy monkey:talk so much so wat have you done ? at least jamie han have the guts to challenge LKY in public. do you dare to do so ?
Is challenging in this manner more important that making moves that really matter?
You are the Singaporean, you have to answer the questions for yourself.
What have i done? I will not sing my own praises. That would be no different from the PAP.
You seem very critical, so what have you done?
-
Persevere and don't give up once you have taken up a cause. Good luck. If you have passions to serve, you will get your support.Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:If walking the talk is not the key to change how then does the points on democracy apply to help change the situation?
How do you evoke change by "sharing of the same cause"?
How are the people sharing the same cause supposed to be? Talk only or walk the talk?
The truly passionate ones are few and far between.
Nets must be cast wide.
Forums are not the only pond but they cannot be ignored. -
Can i at least try to ignite some passion in you?Originally posted by robertteh:Persevere and don't give up once you have taken up a cause. Good luck. If you have passions to serve, you will get your support.
I note your posts and acknowledge your efforts.
To return a word of encouragement,
Robert, keep up your posts. You have proven certain points that others may refuse to acknowledge but for the silent thnking majority out there. The points echo loud and clear. -
if you have done nothing just admit it. dun tok so muchOriginally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Is your idea of a good politician someone who will call others names?
Is challenging in this manner more important that making moves that really matter?
You are the Singaporean, you have to answer the questions for yourself.
What have i done? I will not sing my own praises. That would be no different from the PAP.
You seem very critical, so what have you done? -
Not everyone is a political animal so to speak. I am not one.Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Can i at least try to ignite some passion in you?
I note your posts and acknowledge your efforts.
To return a word of encouragement,
Robert, keep up your posts. You have proven certain points that others may refuse to acknowledge but for the silent thnking majority out there. The points echo loud and clear.
That does not mean I am not interested in politics in the form of giving my personal views objectively based on logics and facts.
If government does the right thing and change its autocratic stance, I will have no problem with autocracy actually. The problem is autocracy is self-serving and self-centred in nature and potence.
If the autocracy changes incorrect policies, there is no reason it will not have my support too.
For the moment I am asking them to acknowledge problems and be more accountable and transparent in whatever it is doing.
For the time being autocracy is simply too one-sided and policies and actions are not conceived with people in mind but only for its ease of governance. This is where the problem is actually. -
Originally posted by robertteh:
The objective: to change incorrect policies.
Not everyone is a political animal so to speak. I am not one.
That does not mean I am not interested in politics in the form of giving my personal views objectively based on logics and facts.
If government does the right thing and change its autocratic stance, I will have no problem with autocracy actually. The problem is autocracy is self-serving and self-centred in nature and potence.
If the autocracy changes incorrect policies, there is no reason it will not have my support too.
For the moment I am asking them to acknowledge problems and be more accountable and transparent in whatever it is doing.
For the time being autocracy is simply too one-sided and policies and actions are not conceived with people in mind but only for its ease of governance. This is where the problem is actually.
The problem is with self-serving self centred autocracy going for ease of governance.
How do you convert "self-centredness" into "people-centredness"?
Do you expect an autocracy which has some of the top minds in Singapore to have overlooked the points that you made? Or do you think that they know but they refuse to admit?
It is only when you make the incumbent see the direct correlation that thinking and acting for the people which would also fulfil their self interest would there be a shift to people-centred policies.
Their interests must be tied to the interests of the people for them to be people-friendly. Do you not think so?
How the incumbent be forced to acknowledge a direct correlation between their interests and the interests fo the people?
Answer: By the risk of being unseated in the General Elections.
Will there be such risk in Singapore if people merely talk?
Answer : No.
You can have a 70% angry electorate in a single ward which can easily number from 15,000 to 20,000 people but without that single person filing his nomination papers against the ruling party's candidate, it will still come to nought.
Will a government change its autocratic stance because of any other reason?
Because some writers and commentators make some remarks?
Answer: No. -
I share your concern,Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:The objective: to change incorrect policies.
The problem is with self-serving self centred autocracy going for ease of governance.
How do you convert "self-centredness" into "people-centredness"?
Do you expect an autocracy which has some of the top minds in Singapore to have overlooked the points that you made? Or do you think that they know but they refuse to admit?
It is only when you make the incumbent see the direct correlation that thinking and acting for the people which would also fulfil their self interest would there be a shift to people-centred policies.
Their interests must be tied to the interests of the people for them to be people-friendly. Do you not think so?
How the incumbent be forced to acknowledge a direct correlation between their interests and the interests fo the people?
Answer: By the risk of being unseated in the General Elections.
Will there be such risk in Singapore if people merely talk?
Answer : No.
You can have a 70% angry electorate in a single ward which can easily number from 15,000 to 20,000 people but without that single person filing his nomination papers against the ruling party's candidate, it will still come to nought.
Will a government change its autocratic stance because of any other reason?
Because some writers and commentators make some remarks?
Answer: No.
Self is the root cause of problems,
By emancipating self,
Through objective,
Accountable and transparent
Quality-time-cost processes
That are easily participated by all,
To attain higher form of self,
Organizational efficiency, teamwork
With coordination and Knowledge application
That will unleash the inner power of all. -
Of all the forums LKY has been to, this was surely his first real test of wits.
To Jamie Han - a man who speaks his mind is a man flowing with confidence. It takes more than just moral guts to sprout a strong argument with the old man.
Indeed, the country needs more of you. -
" Honours studentÂ’s hard talk with Kuan Yew
Down South by SEAH CHIANG NEE
ALMOST yearly, Lee Kuan Yew would pay a visit to the premier campus to talk – and listen – to thousands of undergraduates about the country.
Started when he was a young, combative prime minister, these events rarely produce fireworks or test LeeÂ’s debating skill.
Generally meek or polite, these students would at times ask a few critical questions, most of which touched on jobs and careers. They were predictable occasions.
This year was different.
The latest meeting that took place last week produced some sparks and showed how far away some of todayÂ’s youths have moved from LeeÂ’s political world.
Instead of the usual mild questions, the 82-year-old Minister Mentor got an unexpected earful.
One of the challengers was history honours student Jamie Han, who stressed he wasnÂ’t saying the PeopleÂ’s Action Party was corrupt.
“But the truth of the matter is this: No matter how enlightened a despot is, ultimately he’ll turn into a tyrant if there are no checks and balances in place.”
Applause broke out among the 1,500 students representing all universities here.
Jamie said there must have been times in the past when there was a need for consensus and stability.
“But we have come to the stage where in order to progress, the minority viewpoints have to be heard,” he stressed.
Earlier, another student asked Lee why so many Singaporeans were not regarding their country as home.
“We lack the sense of ownership,” he said.
At best, he added, they tended to see it as a comfortable hotel and, at worst, as a prison that people didnÂ’t have money and resources and the talent to make it.
Lee: What makes you feel you donÂ’t own this place?
Student: I do. ItÂ’s just the impression I have from talking to people.
Asked who owned the Housing Board flat he was living in, he replied: “I believe it’s a 99-year lease, so the Government owns the house.”
But it was Jamie’s use of the word “despot” that hung in the air. In the past, criticisms were about policies; this time it was a strong personal label – the first – to be pinned on Lee.
There had, of course, been stronger attacks on him and his familyÂ’s power but they came anonymously from the Internet, hence with a lot less impact.
It reflects a changing generation. At any rate, todayÂ’s generation has little knowledge or impression of LeeÂ’s role in history and does not feel beholden to him like their elders.
Many are liberals who are dissatisfied with the speed of decontrol of the past decade. Lee, on the other hand, is a conservative who believes in a highly regulated top-down society as prerequisite for stability.
Jamie had also asked for the Internal Security Act and newspaper laws to be reviewed. The channels that offered different views were “either directly or indirectly controlled by the Government”.
And this exchange followed.
Lee asked him if he had written to the newspapers. Yes, he replied, but only one letter was published.
Why not start a publication, asked Lee. Reply: The laws made it very difficult.
Lee: “Well, you have the Internet – put up a website. You know how to put up a website? If you don’t, I know a friend who can help you.”
Lee said he was never a despot. “You don’t put your life at risk in calling me a despot.”
He challenged, as he had often done, anyone who had a passion to join a party and contest via elections. “I say stake your life, come out and put your programme.”
The exchange has propelled Jamie to some sort of instant popularity. To its credit, the media reported the story in detail although it didnÂ’t reflect well on Lee.
Almost overnight, Jamie Han has burst from being an unknown to an admired youth different from the majority of meek bo chap (uncaring) youths concerned only in themselves.
The admiration shown is, however, tempered by concern about what – if anything – will happen to him.
Some were nothing short of speculative fantasy. One thought Jamie had a “death wish”. Another said his career was “half over” even before it began.
Many public commentators saluted his daring speak-up, called it a “catalyst for change”, that deserved some form of award. One said if he were to form a political party, “I will vote for him.”
(Jamie later said he was not interested in going into politics, but believed there was value in speaking up on social issues that move him.)
One commentator said many youths would wait and see – and if Jamie was not punished “the mindset of others will change”.
Describing him as “a sacrificial lamb”, he said that if Jamie was not punished, it would encourage others who shared his views to move into politics where they could make a change. .................................................................................
One Web letter said that at 82, Lee has not changed very much. Otherwise, he asked, why should anyone in this stable environment need to “put his life on the line” to join opposition politics? ......."