Are Singapore open enough?
-
Soros decidedly thinks otherwise....
-
I don't think Soros is open enough.
-
I think quite a lot of us are already open, it's the government's system that's not open or opening up at all.
-
singapore on the map, is pretty surrounded by islands/countries...so we are actually not open enough...thats y govt also abit conserved..
-
our govt is definitely not open enough.
-
should balance between open and loopholes. too open mean we are prone to loopholes which soros will be very gladly to take adv of it. too tight will make things too rigid somehow, so gotta balance it.
also he is used to US openess, so his standard of open is different from us, so i don't really agree with what he say. -
Open-minded Singaporeans, conservative Singapore Government.
-
very true.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Open-minded Singaporeans, conservative Singapore Government. -
and they try to restrict our open-mindedness.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Open-minded Singaporeans, conservative Singapore Government.
they NATO. -
definitely not, otherwise i won't have to restrict the contents of my blog
-
True.Originally posted by dragg:and they try to restrict our open-mindedness.
they NATO. -
Open-mindness is a word with a wide scope. I would change that to maturity. Are Singaporean mature enough for the government to open up?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Open-minded Singaporeans, conservative Singapore Government.
-
Originally posted by TooFree:
The correct question to ask is :-
Open-mindness is a word with a wide scope. I would change that to maturity. Are Singaporean mature enough for the government to open up?
" IS the Ruling Party a.k.a the present Singapore Government - MATURE enough to accept the MATURE ALTERNATIVE VIEWS from Singaporeas, who are or can be MORE MATURE than the members of the Ruling Party a.k.a the present Singapore Government ? " -
To say a word of fairness, the leeway as I have seen is that the society is opening up gradually but at a slower pace than the economy changes. This goes to shows that the government does listen to the voices of the people but at the same time they are weary that if the society open up too fast, some serious implication might gets dire-strait without first reviewing necessary steps and counter measure.Originally posted by Atobe:The correct question to ask is :-
" IS the Ruling Party a.k.a the present Singapore Government - MATURE enough to accept the MATURE ALTERNATIVE VIEWS from Singaporeas, who are or can be MORE MATURE than the members of the Ruling Party a.k.a the present Singapore Government ? "
1. The lower-income families might have difficult playing catch up.
2. Law and order might go hay-wire.
3. Peace and stability may gets disrupted.
4. Investments implication.
5. Jobs.
6. Others.
As an ordinary citizen myself, I too is afraid of the above mentioned when the society gets full-blown when the time is not ripe yet. Slow and gradual in my opinion is good. Despite saying all that, still we must keep pressing for changes if not it get stagnant over time.
-
Unfortunately, the "leeway" that you are seeing is the "LEE way" of POLITICS in Singapore - the Politics of FEAR, the Politics of INSECURITY, the Politics of CONSTANT INSTABILITY.Originally posted by TooFree:To say a word of fairness, the leeway as I have seen is that the society is opening up gradually but at a slower pace than the economy changes. This goes to shows that the government does listen to the voices of the people but at the same time they are weary that if the society open up too fast, some serious implication might gets dire-strait without first reviewing necessary steps and counter measure.
1. The lower-income families might have difficult playing catch up.
2. Law and order might go hay-wire.
3. Peace and stability may gets disrupted.
4. Investments implication.
5. Jobs.
6. Others.
As an ordinary citizen myself, I too is afraid of the above mentioned when the society gets full-blown when the time is not ripe yet. Slow and gradual in my opinion is good. Despite saying all that, still we must keep pressing for changes if not it get stagnant over time.
It is like the "Little Boy" who cry 'WOLF' for the last FORTY YEARS - for the sake of security and development since the 1950s, WHAT HAS BEEN THE COST TO US, TO SINGAPORE ?
We have lost our competitiveness, we lost our entrepreneurship, we lost our inventiveness, we have lost our Intellectual Agility, we have lost our Initiative, we have lost our Creativity, we have lost our INDEPENDENCE, we have lost our POLITICAL RIGHTS.
In the process, we have the "LEE Way" of Elitism, Nepotism, Division, Domination in Politics, Economics, and all other sphere of Life in Singapore. -
Mature has a wide scope too. Mature in what sense? Economically? Politically? Pyscologically?Originally posted by TooFree:Open-mindness is a word with a wide scope. I would change that to maturity. Are Singaporean mature enough for the government to open up? -
TooFree,Originally posted by TooFree:To say a word of fairness, the leeway as I have seen is that the society is opening up gradually but at a slower pace than the economy changes. This goes to shows that the government does listen to the voices of the people but at the same time they are weary that if the society open up too fast, some serious implication might gets dire-strait without first reviewing necessary steps and counter measure.
1. The lower-income families might have difficult playing catch up.
2. Law and order might go hay-wire.
3. Peace and stability may gets disrupted.
4. Investments implication.
5. Jobs.
6. Others.
As an ordinary citizen myself, I too is afraid of the above mentioned when the society gets full-blown when the time is not ripe yet. Slow and gradual in my opinion is good. Despite saying all that, still we must keep pressing for changes if not it get stagnant over time.
"political" (ideological/opinion-hearing), "Society" and "economy" are 2 different things. In the opening up of the economy, the lower income families might have trouble catching up, but opening society doesn't discriminate based on income. The arguments that law and order might go hay-wire and peace and stability may get disrupted are essentially the same argument, and the same excuse that the government uses time and time again. The problem is that there is no reliable global statistic that can prove that argument. Govt pretends we are doing perestroika before glasnost, but our perestroika never ends. Investments and jobs wonce again are economic elements. Listening to people's opinions on the other hand is very different from economy or society (the latter involves allowing bar-top dancing and the casino). It is political opneness. Political openness is of course, often confused by the government (deliberately) with social openness. As for "others", that is very vague.
Don't let the govt play on your fears; see through its facade. Yes, slow and gradual is good, insofar as it allows people to adapt. But it is clear that in some areas - and not security-sensitive even - the government still holds a monopoly. AN example is education. No matter how many times parents, students and teachers feedback on the unfairness and inadequacy of the streaming system (+ GEP + Sports School), the government comes back with the same replies and stubbornly refuses to make a proper concrete amendment. THe few changes it has done to the education system, I like to say, are like changing ornaments on a broken Christmas tree. I agree change must be carried out slowly, but when change is done, it should be REAL change. The problem with the MOE is that it either suddenly overhauls everything in one year or shifts bits and pieces around without effecting any proper change except increased confusion about what the syllabus is. And most unfortunately, students are the ones at the suffering end.
the pikamaster -
What do you expect Soros to be open to?Originally posted by Salman:I don't think Soros is open enough. -
Originally posted by Salman:
A simple low brainer "ONE LINER" certainly help distance yourself to run circles around others.
I don't think Soros is open enough. -
x2Originally posted by ShutterBug:I think quite a lot of us are already open, it's the government's system that's not open or opening up at all. -
Dr Catherine Lim descrided our situation very aptly:
The need for authentic expression was too important, she said. "It can neither be intimidated into permanent silence nor seduced by material wealth," she said. "And if it is, we are all worse off for it."
She called on the Government to let mavericks and "troublemakers" play their roles, as they give society a certain rambunctiousness. That kind of environment, she noted, nurtured a leader like Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
The alternative, she said, is a monolithic society, which makes standard copies of its leaders.
She also had a bigger concern.
"I've come to believe with a heavy heart that even if the Government wanted to do something about it, Singaporeans are so used to the Government making decisions for us, any major change will be viewed with alarm," said Dr Lim.>