Why American people are behind their government?
-
continuing post:
:
Do not forget that the Singapore Press is wholly owned and controlled by persons who are "planted" by the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Government.
Censored press? Pros and cons. Rightly pointed out by Atobe and Mr Robert, most Singaporeans do not have the chance to read bout the failings of Temasek Holdings, our local govt, etc. Having a totally free press does have its cons as well. How bout the debacle on England team manager Sven-Goran Eriksson? It just shows that a free press is profit-oriented and it prefers to over-sensationalize trivial issues regarding big-shots and celebrities.
How "the story of the day" is to develop will depend on the agenda of the Government for the current period. Does the Editor-in-Chief have any freedom to decide on how stories are to be run, or will his own individualistic concept and vision be "tweaked" by the Chairman or the CEO - both are safe appointees approved by the Ruling Elite.:
Welcome to the club of 'believers' of a better Singapore - salmanization or not - it will happen.
That doesn't mean I am a PAP supporter. Far from it. In fact, I know who to vote for in the incoming election-- that is, provided there are opposition candidates.
Having oppositon parties in parliament can always provide some form of opposing yet constructive views to a party that hold too long in power. I do agree with most of the points mentioned by Atobe and Mr Robert bout rising costs, gerrymandering, FTs issues, etc but please do not protray US like a utopia. Maybe we should wait for the results of a poll to judge whether the American people are truly behind their government or not.
As I say, I am just being nosy
And now back to hit the textbooks! Feel free to reply but hopefully no salmanization pls!
There is no doubt about one issue - whether it is in Singapore or the USA, when the button is pressed - for the sake of the country, the Citizens will drop all partisan politics in defense of the country - whether it is the US Citizens, or the Singapore Citizens.
Unfortunately, in the Singapore context, the Emperor and his knaves will soon realize that the Emperor's clothes is all in their imagination, and that after Forty Years of monopolistic rule there remains doubt in the minds of the Emperor and his knaves as to Ethnic Integration, to Entrepreneurship, to Singaporean Talent, to Nationalism, to Political Maturity of Singaporeans. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
finally some figures to shut salman up.
Shooting your brains out - with a complex bundle of "NO BRAINERS - and Mish-mashed ONE LINERS" will not do you any better .
It was found that during the period from 1950 to 2001 - when the US Presidency and Administrations were in the hands of DEMOCRATS:
The World ranking in GDP ranked the USA at 3.8 under the Democrats, compared to 7.2 under Republican rule.
World ranking of Real Disposable Income rank the USA at 5.0 under Democrats compared to 6.0 under Republican.
Employment ranked 4.6 under Democrats, compared to 6.4 under Republicans.
The USA Deficit Reduction ranked the country as 4.2 under the Democrats and 6.38 under the Republicans.
Real Disposable Personal Income GROWTH per Year was 3.65% under the Democrats, compared to 3.08% under the Republicans.
Unemployment fom 1962 to 2001 revealed the jobless rate at 5.1% under Democrat Presidents, and 6.75% under Rupublicans.
GDP growth - from 1962 to 2001, revealed 3.9% under Democratic Rule, and 2.9% under the Republicans.
Percentage Growth in Total Federal Spending under Democrat Presidents revealed 6.96% and 7.57% under Republican Presidents.
Yearly Budget Deficit - 1962 to 2001 was US$36billion under Democrat Presidents; and US$190 billion under Republicans.
With your shallow thinking, can you believe your own statement that the Republicans has done better than Democrats in governing Singapore ? .
[b]Read:
DEMOCRATS vs REPUBLICANS - on the issue of the US Economy.
[/b] -
Hi Atobe, nice to hear from you and I am impressed with your knowledge
"The US Citizens actually supported the Vietnam War in the 1960s until the war stretched on with too high a toll due to the political failure to understand the use of the military to win a decisive war, and allowed the Vietnamese to stretch the manpower resources for too long and wear down the will of the Americans to "sue for peace". "
I disagree with the fact that the US citizens supported. While some of them believed in the Domino Theory, there are others who were opposed to the war. This was especially true when conscription was increased dramatically during the Vietnam War, atrocities committed against the Vietnamese civilians, etc. Human rights?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_war
"Afghanistan continue to receive firm positive support from the US Citizenry in its continued hunt for Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden - to settle scores for the attack to the Twin Towers of the New York World Trade Centre"
Fair enough.
"In any case, have you missed the "heart beat" of this thread in that the US Citizens will have at least the COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS to launch a protest - physical or verbal - towards the policies of a Government which they have elected and gone astray."
From Singapore's route to independence til the early 1990s, the top priority was to transform a third world Singapore into a first world city-state. Given a choice, would you like to live in a Phillipines-alike democracy today, or the Singapore as it is of today? I believe the success of Singapore today is achieved by implementing harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Singapore is considered a miracle today by forgoing certain human rights, whereas other Western countries took much more time to achieve their first-world status as of today.
I am not a student in politics, but what I see is that by forgoing "COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS", the govt has less time to deal with dissent and more time to implement harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Of course, if the ruling party is ineffective, most probably they will lose their ground in the following election. But during those years, the PAP literally won every single seat except Anson.. and its a testament that the citizens are willing to forgo these rights for the sake of economic growth. Phillipines have a democracy and they achieve independence earlier than us, but why are'nt they as rich and successful as the USA?
Of course, the above mentioned discusses bout the early years of Singapore nationhood. Nowadays with the high literacy rate among the young Singaporeans, the fast changing economy, the governing method has TO CHANGE in order to bring the best out of us to keep Singapore competitive. I am an economic idiot, so don't expect me to suggest ideas and ways to improve Singapore's competitiveness.
"Do not let "one bad apple, spoil the entire barrel" is a common sense approach to such a situation.
In which society can we claim to be perfect ?
Even in the very forgiving and hospitable Thai society of devout Buddhists, we see two deviant Thai fishermen raping and murdering an innocent Irish girl holidaying in Thailand"
Its a common fact that the crime rates in US is very high despite the fact that they are first world. If you are telling me that a third world country has high crime rates, it is understandable since starvation can turn a hungry man into a hardcore criminal. If the law and order in US is so good, why was it that over half of the Americans supported the stance of the Singaporean govt in caning Michael Fay? Why is it that the US citizens living in suburban areas are somewhat apprehensive when going out in the late hours of the night?
"At least, in the USA they do not sentence its Citizen to jail and 3 strokes of the cane (if you are below 50 years old) for a minor offense of renting a room or a house to an illegal immigrant."
Agree. Especially when it is harsh to punish a illiterate old person who rent a room out without knowing how to identify real work permits from fake permits. I only hope there are mitigating factors being considered instead of mandatory caning involved.
"In any case, right or wrong, should the World stand silently on the sideline while Saddam Hussein rape and kill his citizens, much as Idi Amin had done to his Ugandan citizens - eating their brains and heart as well ?"
I prefer to see this as a game of chess, where the US can establish influence in the oil rich Middle East region. I don't see US invading Rwanda in 1994 to stop the Rwandan genocide, since Rwanda is of little economic value to the US. Most of the military action that the US get involved in is either of strategic or economic uses e.g. Taiwan, South Korea, Iraq, etc.
"With FREEDOM - of speech, of the press, of gathering, of political participation, of political discourse - one has to accept the total pot of soup in any form.
It also comes with the FREEDOM OF CHOICE - to walk away and not listen to the antics of anyone or any event whom you choose not to pay attention to."
+1
"Can this be done in the present Singapore system, if you decline to attend an important event involving some big wig from the Ruling Party - will retribution come to you in some other form if you reject the invitation?"
Retribution?
ISA ah?
"The problem with the Speakers' Corner is that of the authority closely policing the speakers and the contents of the speeches to be made.
Is there any FREEDOM to be spontaneous at Speakers' Corner ? "
That depends on what topic you are discussing. If you are making animated speeches like "Mr xxx minister is stupid! He is idiot to implement such a policy!" That's downright defamation.
If you are talking about race issues, then good luck to you for meddling with a time bomb. These issues are very sensitive, given Singapore's past history. And more so if you consider that we are surrounded by two large Muslim-dominated countries. Try denouncing Christianity or praising Osama in US and let's see what will happen to the speaker.
There should'nt be any problems if you are addressing a social issue (exclude religions, race) or suggesting alternative ideas towards a govt policy. Criticize is one thing, but a good speaker should also suggest ideas or alternative solutions if he or she really want to comment on a govt policy.
"Singapore has been in the making for FORTY YEARS - and we are supposed to have achieved FIRST WORLD status as observed by MM LKY, yet the political minds of the Ruling Elite is that of a Third World political culture of "kiasuism" - with all the gerrymandering of election boundaries, fear of losing even a single seat to the Opposition, overkill even to an HONEST Opposition Manifesto."
+1. I am somewhat disturbed by the ministers' reactions to the opposition Manifesto. I hope you can see that I do agree with the gerrymandering issues, the rising costs, education and FT issues. -
"Do not forget that the Singapore Press is wholly owned and controlled by persons who are "planted" by the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Government.
How "the story of the day" is to develop will depend on the agenda of the Government for the current period. Does the Editor-in-Chief have any freedom to decide on how stories are to be run, or will his own individualistic concept and vision be "tweaked" by the Chairman or the CEO - both are safe appointees approved by the Ruling Elite."
As I mentioned earlier, there are pros and cons of every single system. You quite rightly mention the cons of a censored press and the pros of a free press, but you have not mentioned the cons of a free press, which I did. The best way is to use the internet, which we are doing right now.
"Welcome to the club of 'believers' of a better Singapore - salmanization or not - it will happen.
There is no doubt about one issue - whether it is in Singapore or the USA, when the button is pressed - for the sake of the country, the Citizens will drop all partisan politics in defense of the country - whether it is the US Citizens, or the Singapore Citizens.
True. But you sound like you have totally given up hope on Singapore.
"Unfortunately, in the Singapore context, the Emperor and his knaves will soon realize that the Emperor's clothes is all in their imagination, and that after Forty Years of monopolistic rule there remains doubt in the minds of the Emperor and his knaves as to Ethnic Integration, to Entrepreneurship, to Singaporean Talent, to Nationalism, to Political Maturity of Singaporeans."
Ethnic Integration-- So unlike the reality of racism in Europe, US and Australia whereby their govt disregards the issue of racism.
For the other above points you mentioned, +1. As I say, change in education is still the key to fostering the above values you mentioned. -
Hey dude, majority of american dont give a damn sh.it about the government cause they are not interested in all that white house capital hill BS.Originally posted by robertteh:America has been a great country where the people support the government at every turn of crisis because its government has a tradition of respecting its people's views and caring for its people.
Just compare what the American government has done over the last 40 years for its people it is not difficult to see why they are behind their government. It is not difficult to understand why Singaporeans are a bit of switch-off and generally unhappy with its government.
But the people are always blamed as whiners or rude. What cause these behavior? I thought among so many scholars some would come out to speak out against the uncaring and disaffective policies and corrections made but none of them have spoken up so far.
The only people who will look after the people will be the people themselves as seen in the NKF saga. Even after horrendous wrong doings were disclosed of the NKF board and its ex-CEO, it looks like the government is not going to listen to people's problems and soon close the chapter with some utterances uncaring denials or justifications like "there was no legal wrongs committed" and "case closed" and "let's move on".
The only people who support the american government are businessman and people who know nothing outside america. -
hehehOriginally posted by robertteh:Just compare what the American government has done over the last 40 years for its people it is not difficult to see why they are behind their government. It is not difficult to understand why Singaporeans are a bit of switch-off and generally unhappy with its government. u must be kidding. Dont you know alot of US citizens hated its government? especially those poorer ones?
the money all goes to the rich, and the poorer US citizens simply hated the US government for their capitalistic and uncaring attitude towards the poorer people. -
its getting less and less now. And the US government even want to pass the act whereby the internal security can "kidnap" people without questions and even eavesdrop people's conversation, etc...Originally posted by ShutterBug:I believe robertteh has a point; THERE IS freedom of speech in USA, and it's people DO HAVE their RIGHTS. We totally lack these two elements.
Mr Bush listens to his people, while we can only listen to our almighty government.
Study so hard, pay so much for education, graduate from UNI to find that jobs are snatched away by our government's favored FT or that for simple reason that locals are expensive to hire due to HIGH LIVING COSTS!!!!
Such striking contrasts.
you MUST be kidding if you say there is freedom in US. EVEN George Soros said that US is becoming a more closed-up country then it is before. -
Precisely, what Salman says is not without truth.Originally posted by Salman:If Americans are behind their govt, why is Bush's ratings so low?
Why are Americans still buying SUVs?
Why is PAP getting better support from Singapoireans as compared to the Republicans?
Too much spinning from Robert Teh. Anything also want to spin.
-
Yup, i am more to Erwin's than to Atobe's. Sorry for the long quote.Originally posted by Erwin_Rommel:Hi Atobe, nice to hear from you and I am impressed with your knowledge
"The US Citizens actually supported the Vietnam War in the 1960s until the war stretched on with too high a toll due to the political failure to understand the use of the military to win a decisive war, and allowed the Vietnamese to stretch the manpower resources for too long and wear down the will of the Americans to "sue for peace". "
I disagree with the fact that the US citizens supported. While some of them believed in the Domino Theory, there are others who were opposed to the war. This was especially true when conscription was increased dramatically during the Vietnam War, atrocities committed against the Vietnamese civilians, etc. Human rights?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_war
"Afghanistan continue to receive firm positive support from the US Citizenry in its continued hunt for Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden - to settle scores for the attack to the Twin Towers of the New York World Trade Centre"
Fair enough.
"In any case, have you missed the "heart beat" of this thread in that the US Citizens will have at least the COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS to launch a protest - physical or verbal - towards the policies of a Government which they have elected and gone astray."
From Singapore's route to independence til the early 1990s, the top priority was to transform a third world Singapore into a first world city-state. Given a choice, would you like to live in a Phillipines-alike democracy today, or the Singapore as it is of today? I believe the success of Singapore today is achieved by implementing harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Singapore is considered a miracle today by forgoing certain human rights, whereas other Western countries took much more time to achieve their first-world status as of today.
I am not a student in politics, but what I see is that by forgoing "COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS", the govt has less time to deal with dissent and more time to implement harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Of course, if the ruling party is ineffective, most probably they will lose their ground in the following election. But during those years, the PAP literally won every single seat except Anson.. and its a testament that the citizens are willing to forgo these rights for the sake of economic growth. Phillipines have a democracy and they achieve independence earlier than us, but why are'nt they as rich and successful as the USA?
Of course, the above mentioned discusses bout the early years of Singapore nationhood. Nowadays with the high literacy rate among the young Singaporeans, the fast changing economy, the governing method has TO CHANGE in order to bring the best out of us to keep Singapore competitive. I am an economic idiot, so don't expect me to suggest ideas and ways to improve Singapore's competitiveness.
"Do not let "one bad apple, spoil the entire barrel" is a common sense approach to such a situation.
In which society can we claim to be perfect ?
Even in the very forgiving and hospitable Thai society of devout Buddhists, we see two deviant Thai fishermen raping and murdering an innocent Irish girl holidaying in Thailand"
Its a common fact that the crime rates in US is very high despite the fact that they are first world. If you are telling me that a third world country has high crime rates, it is understandable since starvation can turn a hungry man into a hardcore criminal. If the law and order in US is so good, why was it that over half of the Americans supported the stance of the Singaporean govt in caning Michael Fay? Why is it that the US citizens living in suburban areas are somewhat apprehensive when going out in the late hours of the night?
"At least, in the USA they do not sentence its Citizen to jail and 3 strokes of the cane (if you are below 50 years old) for a minor offense of renting a room or a house to an illegal immigrant."
Agree. Especially when it is harsh to punish a illiterate old person who rent a room out without knowing how to identify real work permits from fake permits. I only hope there are mitigating factors being considered instead of mandatory caning involved.
"In any case, right or wrong, should the World stand silently on the sideline while Saddam Hussein rape and kill his citizens, much as Idi Amin had done to his Ugandan citizens - eating their brains and heart as well ?"
I prefer to see this as a game of chess, where the US can establish influence in the oil rich Middle East region. I don't see US invading Rwanda in 1994 to stop the Rwandan genocide, since Rwanda is of little economic value to the US. Most of the military action that the US get involved in is either of strategic or economic uses e.g. Taiwan, South Korea, Iraq, etc.
"With FREEDOM - of speech, of the press, of gathering, of political participation, of political discourse - one has to accept the total pot of soup in any form.
It also comes with the FREEDOM OF CHOICE - to walk away and not listen to the antics of anyone or any event whom you choose not to pay attention to."
+1
"Can this be done in the present Singapore system, if you decline to attend an important event involving some big wig from the Ruling Party - will retribution come to you in some other form if you reject the invitation?"
Retribution?
ISA ah?
"The problem with the Speakers' Corner is that of the authority closely policing the speakers and the contents of the speeches to be made.
Is there any FREEDOM to be spontaneous at Speakers' Corner ? "
That depends on what topic you are discussing. If you are making animated speeches like "Mr xxx minister is stupid! He is idiot to implement such a policy!" That's downright defamation.
If you are talking about race issues, then good luck to you for meddling with a time bomb. These issues are very sensitive, given Singapore's past history. And more so if you consider that we are surrounded by two large Muslim-dominated countries. Try denouncing Christianity or praising Osama in US and let's see what will happen to the speaker.
There should'nt be any problems if you are addressing a social issue (exclude religions, race) or suggesting alternative ideas towards a govt policy. Criticize is one thing, but a good speaker should also suggest ideas or alternative solutions if he or she really want to comment on a govt policy.
"Singapore has been in the making for FORTY YEARS - and we are supposed to have achieved FIRST WORLD status as observed by MM LKY, yet the political minds of the Ruling Elite is that of a Third World political culture of "kiasuism" - with all the gerrymandering of election boundaries, fear of losing even a single seat to the Opposition, overkill even to an HONEST Opposition Manifesto."
+1. I am somewhat disturbed by the ministers' reactions to the opposition Manifesto. I hope you can see that I do agree with the gerrymandering issues, the rising costs, education and FT issues. -
I am curious: what is the basis for your reaching this conclusion?Originally posted by Erwin_Rommel:Why is it that the US citizens living in suburban areas are somewhat apprehensive when going out in the late hours of the night? -
Hi. Actually I am making a deduction from this website.Originally posted by Meia Gisborn:I am curious: what is the basis for your reaching this conclusion?
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/activity_at_time_of_incident.htm
Under the columns of "activities at home" and "sleeping" which I presume to be at night, the combined percentage is considered quite high (for a large population), which means that large number of criminals do lurk at night looking for potential victims. How safe would you be knowing that there is a statistically high chance for criminals to be lurking in an average American suburb? -
Thank you for providing the link. I downloaded the PDF file and perused the data contained therein, and believe your deduction might be a tad flawed.Originally posted by Erwin_Rommel:Hi. Actually I am making a deduction from this website.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/activity_at_time_of_incident.htm
Under the columns of "activities at home" and "sleeping" which I presume to be at night, the combined percentage is considered quite high (for a large population), which means that large number of criminals do lurk at night looking for potential victims. How safe would you be knowing that there is a statistically high chance for criminals to be lurking in an average American suburb?
The figures provided for crimes committed within households do not distinguish between urban or suburban locales. I suspect that the majority of these household crimes take place in multi-unit dwellings like projects, apartment complexes and condos located in and around major urban areas which have historically highers rates of crime, and are likely occupied by lower income families.
Contrary to your assertion, I would have a statistically lower chance of being a victim of a crime whilst living in the suburbs. This has, in fact, proven to be the case in the over 17 years that I have lived here.
I am also curious to know if you have spent any appreciable amount time living in the US. -
You are correct in your statement concerning the Citizen's support to the Vietnam War; however you must recall that the American involvement in the Vietnam War span across more then TWENTY YEARS - from the Eisenhower Administration of the 1950s to Nixon in the 1970s.Originally posted by Erwin_Rommel:Hi Atobe, nice to hear from you and I am impressed with your knowledge
"The US Citizens actually supported the Vietnam War in the 1960s until the war stretched on with too high a toll due to the political failure to understand the use of the military to win a decisive war, and allowed the Vietnamese to stretch the manpower resources for too long and wear down the will of the Americans to "sue for peace". "
I disagree with the fact that the US citizens supported. While some of them believed in the Domino Theory, there are others who were opposed to the war. This was especially true when conscription was increased dramatically during the Vietnam War, atrocities committed against the Vietnamese civilians, etc. Human rights?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_war
It all depends on the time lines that you are making reference to.
In the 1950s and 1960, during the Eisenhower and Kennedy's administrations, most US Citizens were very much in favor of American funds, material and manpower (limited advisory roles) to any country on this globe, so as to stem the Red Tide from swamping the maps of this World.
This was a natural reaction of fear from the USA during that period due to Communist Russia and Communist China aggressive diplomacy and subservesive politics to change the world political map.:
In your statement, do you actually mean that this Ruling Political Party had trade-off the "COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS" for the expediency of implementing effective policies - and not in the double negative to make some positive outcome ?
"In any case, have you missed the "heart beat" of this thread in that the US Citizens will have at least the COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS to launch a protest - physical or verbal - towards the policies of a Government which they have elected and gone astray."
From Singapore's route to independence til the early 1990s, the top priority was to transform a third world Singapore into a first world city-state. Given a choice, would you like to live in a Phillipines-alike democracy today, or the Singapore as it is of today? I believe the success of Singapore today is achieved by implementing harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Singapore is considered a miracle today by forgoing certain human rights, whereas other Western countries took much more time to achieve their first-world status as of today.
I am not a student in politics, but what I see is that by forgoing "COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS", the govt has less time to deal with dissent and more time to implement harsh, unpopular yet effective policies. Of course, if the ruling party is ineffective, most probably they will lose their ground in the following election. But during those years, the PAP literally won every single seat except Anson.. and its a testament that the citizens are willing to forgo these rights for the sake of economic growth. Phillipines have a democracy and they achieve independence earlier than us, but why are'nt they as rich and successful as the USA?
Of course, the above mentioned discusses bout the early years of Singapore nationhood. Nowadays with the high literacy rate among the young Singaporeans, the fast changing economy, the governing method has TO CHANGE in order to bring the best out of us to keep Singapore competitive. I am an economic idiot, so don't expect me to suggest ideas and ways to improve Singapore's competitiveness.
What price did Singapore pay for an aggressive role that the Ruling Party played by sweeping aside all alternative views, and detaining anyone under the ISA without any charge being brought to a highly reputed Singapore Court of Law ?
You will probably have heard the lamenting regrets of LKY in recent years of an over aggressive Family Planning Program, and the Law that protects Women's Right preventing 'Second Wives' to be taken by any successful male to expand his genetic pool.
If you did not hear of this, you must have heard the more current lamenting of the lack of talent, of entrepreneurship, of low birth rates ?
With regards to the elections during the early years - circa 1959-1960 - there were ten political parties vying for 51 seats in the1959 Parliament, the PAP won a majority of 43 seats.
The period towards Singapore entry into Malaysia, there were loud debate against the terms and conditions for Singapore's entry as a member state of the proposed Malaysia. In the tussle for public opinion, LKY had several Opposition members arrested and jailed, allowing his Party to dominate the Singapore Parliament to this day.
The dominance and election success was partly helped by the many insidious and calculated moves that prejudiced a fair election process with the numbering of voter slips - which remained pervasive to this day.
You could read up robbertteh's postings on the subject of 'how to improve singapore's competitiveness'.:
For a country that is 1000 times bigger in land mass, and a population that is 300 times bigger, any crime rate will be seen to be too high - but when compared as a ratio to its land mass and population size, is it truly high ?
"Do not let "one bad apple, spoil the entire barrel" is a common sense approach to such a situation.
In which society can we claim to be perfect ?
Even in the very forgiving and hospitable Thai society of devout Buddhists, we see two deviant Thai fishermen raping and murdering an innocent Irish girl holidaying in Thailand"
Its a common fact that the crime rates in US is very high despite the fact that they are first world. If you are telling me that a third world country has high crime rates, it is understandable since starvation can turn a hungry man into a hardcore criminal. If the law and order in US is so good, why was it that over half of the Americans supported the stance of the Singaporean govt in caning Michael Fay? Why is it that the US citizens living in suburban areas are somewhat apprehensive when going out in the late hours of the night?
By comparison, Singapore's small size have seen an increase of 813 per 100,000 population for the year 2004 - as published by the General Household Survey 2005 - as well as the Police Report on Singapore Crime in 2004.
Surprisingly, by comparison, the US Bureau of Justice Statistics has a website that provides Statistics at a Glance - (last revised on 7 September 2005) - shows most major crimes have declined during the preceding period.
The US Citizens support of the Singaporean caning of Michael Fay is not a reflection of the increase in crime but the frustrations towards a Law that prohibit the use corporal punishment as part of parental guidance. -
continuation:
:
Even the Chief Justice of Singapore has also expressed similar sentiments that unless Parliament amend the legislation, the Judiciary is bound by the Law.
"At least, in the USA they do not sentence its Citizen to jail and 3 strokes of the cane (if you are below 50 years old) for a minor offense of renting a room or a house to an illegal immigrant."
Agree. Especially when it is harsh to punish a illiterate old person who rent a room out without knowing how to identify real work permits from fake permits. I only hope there are mitigating factors being considered instead of mandatory caning involved.
Have Singaporeans elected a Political Party that has become heartless and numbed by the arrogance of overwhelming power that they have accumulated over the years ?
In his early years in Politics as an Opposition, LKY had so eloquently stated :
"Repression, Sir, is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love - it is always easier the second time!
The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course, with constant repetition, you get more and more brazen in the attack and in the scope of the attack":
It all boils down to the 'survival instinct' and the 'law of the jungle' where the fittest survive.
"In any case, right or wrong, should the World stand silently on the sideline while Saddam Hussein rape and kill his citizens, much as Idi Amin had done to his Ugandan citizens - eating their brains and heart as well ?"
I prefer to see this as a game of chess, where the US can establish influence in the oil rich Middle East region. I don't see US invading Rwanda in 1994 to stop the Rwandan genocide, since Rwanda is of little economic value to the US. Most of the military action that the US get involved in is either of strategic or economic uses e.g. Taiwan, South Korea, Iraq, etc.
In a global competition that is largely driven by industries and commerce, it will also require that one's trading partners will share a certain degree of similar values - which at times require a blinkered vision, out of politico-economic expediency.:
If you are in the Government or GLC employ, retribution may not necessarily be through the ISA but more insignificant and subtle use of silent change to your career, or perhaps your "previously approved transport claims will be dug out to be used against you for overclaiming by a few dollars".
"Can this be done in the present Singapore system, if you decline to attend an important event involving some big wig from the Ruling Party - will retribution come to you in some other form if you reject the invitation?"
Retribution?
ISA ah?:
If Singapore is advertised to equal to any country rated as the First World, surely our social, cultural, and political maturity will have also be of equal status to the economic recognition given ?
"The problem with the Speakers' Corner is that of the authority closely policing the speakers and the contents of the speeches to be made.
Is there any FREEDOM to be spontaneous at Speakers' Corner ? "
That depends on what topic you are discussing. If you are making animated speeches like "Mr xxx minister is stupid! He is idiot to implement such a policy!" That's downright defamation.
If you are talking about race issues, then good luck to you for meddling with a time bomb. These issues are very sensitive, given Singapore's past history. And more so if you consider that we are surrounded by two large Muslim-dominated countries. Try denouncing Christianity or praising Osama in US and let's see what will happen to the speaker.
There should'nt be any problems if you are addressing a social issue (exclude religions, race) or suggesting alternative ideas towards a govt policy. Criticize is one thing, but a good speaker should also suggest ideas or alternative solutions if he or she really want to comment on a govt policy.
Unfortunately, although our economic achievements is equal to that of the First World, our Social-Political sectors remains sadly neglected.:
This is the sad truth of the mentality of the Ruling Elite, who pride themselves to be scholarly elite but have the political coarseness of an insecure Third World politician - afraid to lose the spoils that they have given to themselves.
"Singapore has been in the making for FORTY YEARS - and we are supposed to have achieved FIRST WORLD status as observed by MM LKY, yet the political minds of the Ruling Elite is that of a Third World political culture of "kiasuism" - with all the gerrymandering of election boundaries, fear of losing even a single seat to the Opposition, overkill even to an HONEST Opposition Manifesto."
+1. I am somewhat disturbed by the ministers' reactions to the opposition Manifesto. I hope you can see that I do agree with the gerrymandering issues, the rising costs, education and FT issues. -
continuation::
Can there be any 'cons' with a Free Press in a FREE SOCIETY ?
"Do not forget that the Singapore Press is wholly owned and controlled by persons who are "planted" by the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Government.
How "the story of the day" is to develop will depend on the agenda of the Government for the current period. Does the Editor-in-Chief have any freedom to decide on how stories are to be run, or will his own individualistic concept and vision be "tweaked" by the Chairman or the CEO - both are safe appointees approved by the Ruling Elite."
As I mentioned earlier, there are pros and cons of every single system. You quite rightly mention the cons of a censored press and the pros of a free press, but you have not mentioned the cons of a free press, which I did. The best way is to use the internet, which we are doing right now.
Surely, those who are libelled are FREE to take up a libel suit, as has been the practise by the Political Elites from the present Ruling Political Party ?
Can the same be available to the insignificant Singaporean, whose own privacy is invaded even within the confines of his home ?:
How on earth did you arrive at such a perception ?
"Welcome to the club of 'believers' of a better Singapore - salmanization or not - it will happen.
There is no doubt about one issue - whether it is in Singapore or the USA, when the button is pressed - for the sake of the country, the Citizens will drop all partisan politics in defense of the country - whether it is the US Citizens, or the Singapore Citizens.
True. But you sound like you have totally given up hope on Singapore.
I have totally given up hope on the Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party in ever returning to its roots instead of accumulating more power for itself, shrouding all its workings in total legislated secrecy that is protected by the Secrecy Act.
From an extract of a study on LKY's "Socialism" Reconsidered (Begin from last line of Page 35-36), it state that -
"From its inception, the PAP advocated that social security be available to 'all those who through sickness, infirmity or old age can (no) longer work'. The Party's 1955 election manifesto went further by calling for the introduction of child endowment, maternity allowances and unemployment benefits, as well as the benefits outlined in the party's original Manifesto. During the subsequent election campaign the PAP called for the abolition of the CPF."
The outcome of the twists and turns of the chameleon-like political character of the Ruling Party is obvious by now, as it continue to place expediency over commitment to itself more than towards the development of Singaporeans.:
Racism is an ugly word in any country.
"Unfortunately, in the Singapore context, the Emperor and his knaves will soon realize that the Emperor's clothes is all in their imagination, and that after Forty Years of monopolistic rule there remains doubt in the minds of the Emperor and his knaves as to Ethnic Integration, to Entrepreneurship, to Singaporean Talent, to Nationalism, to Political Maturity of Singaporeans."
Ethnic Integration-- So unlike the reality of racism in Europe, US and Australia whereby their govt disregards the issue of racism.
For the other above points you mentioned, +1. As I say, change in education is still the key to fostering the above values you mentioned.
It is not true that the Government in Europe, US and Australia disregards the issue of racism.
The Civil Rights Movement forms the basis from which the US Federal Law was formulated to take precedence over ride the State Law that any offender can find protection, and has been used to prosecute all racist crime and discrmination occurring anywhere in the USA.
Similarly, in Europe - from the experience of the Holocaust, the European Union and its Agencies are mobilised to combat any acts of racism or discrimination, where agencies such as EUROCONE has been formed to eradicate racism.
"An European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) was set up following a decision of the First Summit of Heads of States and Government of the member states of the Council of Europe"
Similarly in Australia, racist (Paula Hansen) has been ostracised by the larger Australian community, and Australian Federal Law will allow the severest punishment to be meted out to any racist offender.
Efforts have been made by the Australian Federal Government to change social attitude by setting up a new department headed by an Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner
However, racism should not be confused with the respective Government policy towards foreign immigrants who attempt to enter the country illegally. -
The posts nowadays are too long for me to digest.
-
Let me catch my breadth first. -
Hi Atobe
"You are correct in your statement concerning the Citizen's support to the Vietnam War; however you must recall that the American involvement in the Vietnam War span across more then TWENTY YEARS - from the Eisenhower Administration of the 1950s to Nixon in the 1970s."
Not only did the Vietnam War took a toll, there was increased conscription and there were also reports of atrocities committed against the Vietnamese civilians. These factors caused a large number of US citizens to stage protests against the rise in conscription and the atrocities committed against the Vietnamese civilians. The US govt instead began investigations of U.S. citizens who were suspected of aiding the NLF. This occurred in mid 1960s.
"You will probably have heard the lamenting regrets of LKY in recent years of an over aggressive Family Planning Program, and the Law that protects Women's Right preventing 'Second Wives' to be taken by any successful male to expand his genetic pool."
+1 A developing country (just like Singapore that time) will have a large, youthful population and the demographc curve would be a pyramid, meaning if the trend continues, there would be a risk of over-population and unemployment.
"If you did not hear of this, you must have heard the more current lamenting of the lack of talent, of entrepreneurship, of low birth rates?"
The lack of talent and entrepreneurship are due to the rigid and inflexible education system imposed by the MOE. You should see that I have always lamented the Singapore education system.
Low birth rates? ALL first world/developed countries have this problem. Japan, France, Singapore, etc have a large aging population and low birth rates. Even US, UK and France--the countries that pride themselves on human rights, face the problem of low birth rate. Then let me ask you, if you are the leader of the country, what would you do to solve this problem? And things are worse during a recent findings that Singapore is ranked last in terms of erm.. number of love-making sessions!
"The period towards Singapore entry into Malaysia, there were loud debate against the terms and conditions for Singapore's entry as a member state of the proposed Malaysia. In the tussle for public opinion, LKY had several Opposition members arrested and jailed, allowing his Party to dominate the Singapore Parliament to this day."
You mean Operation Coldstore? Well, LKY invoked the ISA, which was introduced by the BRITIsH THEMSELVES, to arrest Barisan Socialis members before the merger. In those days, communists were viewed almost in the same light as how we view terrorists right now. I would say he was shrewd enough to use a law introduced by the British tO round the members up so that Singapore could be broken free of British control.
Of course, the merger was a mistake. And no less LKY's fault. His promise not to engage in Federal policies was broken and Malaysia and Singapore ties continue to be strained til this day.
Come to think of it, the preacher of human rights, USA, also has a similar law as ISA, except that it is better-named-- Patriot Act.
"The dominance and election success was partly helped by the many insidious and calculated moves that prejudiced a fair election process with the numbering of voter slips - which remained pervasive to this day."
Gerrymandering, etc issues, which I have acknowledged. -
The US Citizens support of the Singaporean caning of Michael Fay is not a reflection of the increase in crime but the frustrations towards a Law that prohibit the use corporal punishment as part of parental guidance."
You may ask, why would these Americans want to use coporal punishment? Are they somewhat disillusioned with their law? Or could it be that their penal system is way too lax? As I mentioned earlier, a convicted murderer has the opportunity to have a holiday out of the prison. Please don't tell me you will feel very very safe walking alone with him in the dark.
"Even the Chief Justice of Singapore has also expressed similar sentiments that unless Parliament amend the legislation, the Judiciary is bound by the Law."
+1. Oral sex is a crime?!
"In his early years in Politics as an Opposition, LKY had so eloquently stated :
"Repression, Sir, is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love - it is always easier the second time!
The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course, with constant repetition, you get more and more brazen in the attack and in the scope of the attack" "
I have always viewed him as a stern leader. Not flinching an eye even when implementing the most unpopular policies, he was quoted to be preferred to be feared than to be respected. To me, a developing country needs a stern, no nonsense leader. The result of Singapore just before he stepped down as PM says it all. He used the most un-orthodox method of governing and implemented controversial policies, but Singapore become prosperous. You can't deny that, do you? And Singapore's route to success has been being studied by other countries.
Now that Singapore has become a developed country, what's the route? Seriously, nobody knows. Even other developed countries are not sure of the answer since technology, globalization, etc happens in the twinkle of the eye. IMHO, a new way of governing should ensure that the people's wishes be conveyed to them. So I agree partly with you about the PAP holding power for too long.
"It all boils down to the 'survival instinct' and the 'law of the jungle' where the fittest survive.
In a global competition that is largely driven by industries and commerce, it will also require that one's trading partners will share a certain degree of similar values - which at times require a blinkered vision, out of politico-economic expediency"
So is invading another country on the pretext of "liberating" people who are under a cruel regime deem justified when in actual fact they are trying to gain economic advantage? Come on, we are talking about the USA, the world leader and the preacher of human rights. I hope you can still remember the prisoners' abuse, etc. -
"The Civil Rights Movement forms the basis from which the US Federal Law was formulated to take precedence over ride the State Law that any offender can find protection, and has been used to prosecute all racist crime and discrmination occurring anywhere in the USA.
Similarly, in Europe - from the experience of the Holocaust, the European Union and its Agencies are mobilised to combat any acts of racism or discrimination, where agencies such as EUROCONE has been formed to eradicate racism.
"An European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) was set up following a decision of the First Summit of Heads of States and Government of the member states of the Council of Europe"
Similarly in Australia, racist (Paula Hansen) has been ostracised by the larger Australian community, and Australian Federal Law will allow the severest punishment to be meted out to any racist offender.
Efforts have been made by the Australian Federal Government to change social attitude by setting up a new department headed by an Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner
However, racism should not be confused with the respective Government policy towards foreign immigrants who attempt to enter the country illegally."
Sure. They do set up quite a number of govt-based organisations with fanciful names to counter racism. So has the racism situation over there improved? Hope you can provide me with some statistics. -
Ah Nightzip, both me and Atobe have been out of point! Haha..Originally posted by nightzip:The posts nowadays are too long for me to digest.
Just to clarify, I am neither a PAP nor anti-US supporter. I do admire their education trend and I do respect Human Rights. But when you see the way the US preaches the values of human rights to other countries and yet they themselves are not abiding these rights fully, should these countries be condemned?
And this leads to one important question, are the Americans fully behind their government? -
Heil Erwin_RommelOriginally posted by Erwin_Rommel:Ah Nightzip, both me and Atobe have been out of point! Haha..
It was fun going through it all, and it just have to end some way so as to allow all to 'zip through the night'. . -
good one! Atobe.
-
With the new annoucement on 2007 budget, i will be interested to see if americans are still behind their government.
Outlining spending plans for the 2007 fiscal year, Mr Bush has sought backing for a 6.9% jump in US military spending to $439.3bn.
With the focus firmly on the threat of terrorism, Mr Bush also wants a 3.3% rise in homeland security funds.
Cuts are proposed in areas such as health to help trim the budget deficit.
Mr Bush wants to cut spending on Medicare - the healthcare programme for the poor, elderly and disabled - by $35.9bn over the next five years. -
Its not the people but the representatives that will vote.
The Bush administration have been over spending like crazy all these years, including on healthcare that the state cannot pay for and the people know it.
The new budget will probably go down well with many Americans because they too are concerned with the overspending and this is a sticking point among his supporters.
BTW, all this overspending never came up until after Katrina, Congress hid it pretty well only after the elections. In other words, Bush seems to get things his way quietly and effectively.