SDP/CSJ support SIA boycott?
-
There will always be poor people anywhere you go.
Singapore's poor are considered rich elsewhere. -
I agreed on this statement n no offence, what u hink of those local argue for the sake of the argument?Originally posted by Yi Peng:There will always be poor people anywhere you go.
Singapore's poor are considered rich elsewhere. -
I think they ought to go live in other countries for a while.
You can see a lot of homeless in UK and NY. -
Poverty should be measured within a country, and not on an international basis.
To measure poverty on an international basis in the case of Singapore only serves to undermine the plight of the poor people in Singapore. By absolute standard, it's true that they are not that bad, but their poverty state is the result of relatively high living standard in Singapore. Their income is not sufficient to compensate for the standard of living in Singapore. By saying they are not as bad as their overseas counterparts, it's akin to saying that these fellow Singaporeans do not deserve financial aid. These fellow Singaporeans deserve a better life.
BTW I do not see how boycotting SIA has anything to do international talks held in Singapore. Our government is no doubt a bas-tar-d if they do not let international groups to demonstrate here. The fact is they are already a bas-tar-d to not let us Singaporeans demonstrate. Intolerance begets intolerance. -
should include picketing =D
-
SDP & CSJ has no originality. That party only picks on current issue that increases their popularity n make themselves look good.
They have no good plans of their own.
What is their idea? Of having a link in their official website on this boycotting. They are with them? The party is not looking at our country's interest but others.
http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/articleWBIMF1.html -
Second complaint sent to the UN on CSJ case10 Mar 06
2.What a award winner!
He(CSJ) was an Honorary Research Associate at Monash Asia Institute, Melbourne, Australia (1997),
Human Rights Fellow at University of Chicago, US (2001),
and the Reagan-Fascell Human Rights Fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy, Washington DC, US (2004).
Chee was given the Defender of Democracy Award in 2003 by Parliamentarians for Global Action.
In 2005 he was awarded the Hellman-Hammett grant for persecuted writers by Human Rights Watch. Chee is also the author of five books.
3.Sg is not so bad.His books focus on the government's anti-free speech policies. Most of them are not allowed to be sold in Singapore,
Which books are not allowed to be sold here?Why there are plenty in National Libarary? -
i tink this is getting a bit off topic....
the problem is dat many singaporeans still cant reallie match up the living standard as the price of goods n services keep increasing like nobody's business but their pay did nt increase or wad....
no doubt yi peng is right, everywhere u go, u get poor people around but the thing is in singapore the richer are getting richer n the poor are getting poorer?.....if dat is the case then dat will be a problem....as goods n services gets more n more expensive, soon those pple of the low income who could substain their livings previously now find it difficult to do so coz of the increase of the general standard of living in singapore.........
government has been pressing for re-training n re-upgrading of skills n stuff like dat but how far can dey go?....not many pple are quick learners n dats explains why some pple dey dun reallie wan to go for re-training.......muz sometimes understand the mentality of pple....... -
Originally posted by geodome:
not letting singaporeans demonstrate ensures peace.....n for such a small country like singapore, wad happen if so many singaporeans demonstrate?....the whole country can fall into a v jia lat crisis, if u allow demonstration, pple's mood are v easily raved up and in a small country like singapore, news travel v fast......further more when a country is not stable, tourism n many other industries are affected.......do u wan to see money being drained away?....n especially when we are a city country with no natural resources to fall back on, survival is at stake........
Poverty should be measured within a country, and not on an international basis.
To measure poverty on an international basis in the case of Singapore only serves to undermine the plight of the poor people in Singapore. By absolute standard, it's true that they are not that bad, [b]but their poverty state is the result of relatively high living standard in Singapore. Their income is not sufficient to compensate for the standard of living in Singapore. By saying they are not as bad as their overseas counterparts, it's akin to saying that these fellow Singaporeans do not deserve financial aid. These fellow Singaporeans deserve a better life.
BTW I do not see how boycotting SIA has anything to do international talks held in Singapore. Our government is no doubt a bas-tar-d if they do not let international groups to demonstrate here. The fact is they are already a bas-tar-d to not let us Singaporeans demonstrate. Intolerance begets intolerance.[/b]
freedom of speech is important, i recognise dat, but maybe u wan to tink abt wad the reason behind dat our government does not wan to allow demonstration.....this is juz like why government build expressway but regulates speed on the vehicles travelling on it.....u can say: hey look, why should dere be speed limit on these expressway when i am a taxpayer n i wan to travel wad speed i wan coz this is my rights.........but tink, wad will happen if dere are no speed limits and pple can travel as fast as they can??.........
as for international groups demonstrating here, actually is the same....our government is afraid dat our own pple would participate and causes disruption to the society......u tink singapore govenment does not faces international pressure on freedom on speech??.....i nt defending the government but tink from the government's view of point yeah?........... -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
When you listen to a 'fairy tale' for so long, you will believe that the 'fairy tale' is a true life event - as you cannot know of any other tales.
not letting singaporeans demonstrate ensures peace.....n for such a small country like singapore, wad happen if so many singaporeans demonstrate?....the whole country can fall into a v jia lat crisis, if u allow demonstration, pple's mood are v easily raved up and in a small country like singapore, news travel v fast......further more when a country is not stable, tourism n many other industries are affected.......do u wan to see money being drained away?....n especially when we are a city country with no natural resources to fall back on, survival is at stake........
freedom of speech is important, i recognise dat, but maybe u wan to tink abt wad the reason behind dat our government does not wan to allow demonstration.....this is juz like why government build expressway but regulates speed on the vehicles travelling on it.....u can say: hey look, why should dere be speed limit on these expressway when i am a taxpayer n i wan to travel wad speed i wan coz this is my rights.........but tink, wad will happen if dere are no speed limits and pple can travel as fast as they can??.........
as for international groups demonstrating here, actually is the same....our government is afraid dat our own pple would participate and causes disruption to the society......u tink singapore govenment does not faces international pressure on freedom on speech??.....i nt defending the government but tink from the government's view of point yeah?...........
When you watch only 'horror movies' and nothing else, you will believe that life is but a 'horror movie' - as you know of no other events.
If demonstrations are always disorderly, how do we explain for the 'wild Orchard Road Swing Party of the late 1990s' ?
If constant demonstrations can affect economic growth and progress, surely Hong Kong should already be in an economic slump now ?
What is the reason for the Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party for discouraging Singaporeans from being pro-active in demonstrating to publicize the issues which is in the Public Interest ?
Is it not logical that the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Singapore Government is fearful that Singaporeans will become familiar with their political rights and their political power as a united and organised group of Singaporeans ?
Is it not true that the Ruling Political Party is afraid that others will usurp the PRO-ACTIVE Political Role which they intend to monopolise for themselves ? -
Originally posted by Yi Peng:
For once your brilliance shine through the smoke that always seem to shroud the Salman's mind.
There will always be poor people anywhere you go.
Singapore's poor are considered rich elsewhere.
It is true brilliance in observations that the homeless in Singapore is able to live on the clean streets and HDB void decks - compared to the filth and slum of that the homeless in other Third World countries have to live.
It is true ability in ability to differentiate the Singapore poor drinking the remaining soup from the bowls that have been left behind by others, picking the scraps on the table, and eating the bits of rice, noodles and leftover meat on bones on finished plates - compared to the poor in other countries that have to pick the food from trash cans and rubbish bins.
It is genius to be able to differentiate that the Singapore poor is able to get better worn out garments than those poor from other Third World poor.
It must be a great mind to note the difference between the Poor in the First World with the Poor found in the Third World, even a Singapore Dollar in the pocket of the Singaporean Poor has a higher value than the currency in the pocket of the Poor from other Third World Country.
Surely the Singaporean Poor deserve to be prouder and more conceited than their Poor cousins from the other Third World countries ?
It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail.
Gore Vidal (1925 - )
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell (1903 - 1950), "Animal Farm"
Self-conceit may lead to self-destruction.
Aesop (620 BC - 560 BC),
The Frog and the Ox
The smaller the mind the greater the conceit.
Aesop (620 BC - 560 BC)
When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it.
Bernard Bailey -
the mentality of hongkong n singapore citizen's mind are not the same....hongkong was once ruled by the britiish which emphasized on democracy.......demostrations are allowed in the past in hong kong and results is dat it has not showned or affected the economy.......the demostrations are usually peaceful and does not cause any problems.....Originally posted by Atobe:When you listen to a 'fairy tale' for so long, you will believe that the 'fairy tale' is a true life event - as you cannot know of any other tales.
When you watch only 'horror movies' and nothing else, you will believe that life is but a 'horror movie' - as you know of no other events.
If demonstrations are always disorderly, how do we explain for the 'wild Orchard Road Swing Party of the late 1990s' ?
If constant demonstrations can affect economic growth and progress, surely Hong Kong should already be in an economic slump now ?
What is the reason for the Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party for discouraging Singaporeans from being pro-active in demonstrating to publicize the issues which is in the Public Interest ?
Is it not logical that the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Singapore Government is fearful that Singaporeans will become familiar with their political rights and their political power as a united and organised group of Singaporeans ?
Is it not true that the Ruling Political Party is afraid that others will usurp the PRO-ACTIVE Political Role which they intend to monopolise for themselves ?
i am sure you studied singapore history before and i tink u cant blame why the government does not allow demostrations to be allowed here.... racial riots, hock lee bus riot...remember, the first generation of leaders in PAP are still in the parliment today...they hav seen more den us so definitely they would object to demostrations here and their words carry lots of weight......i personally feel that to a certain extent demostrations should be allowed but den wad the government tinks might not be the same as the citizens.....
maybe the future generations of our govenrment may change the laws....who noes.... -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
If you remember history, Singapore was a British Colony, and was ruled by a British Colonial Government from 1819 till our own internal self-rule in 1951, and full independence through Malaysia in 1962.
the mentality of hongkong n singapore citizen's mind are not the same....hongkong was once ruled by the britiish which emphasized on democracy.......demostrations are allowed in the past in hong kong and results is dat it has not showned or affected the economy.......the demostrations are usually peaceful and does not cause any problems.....
i am sure you studied singapore history before and i tink u cant blame why the government does not allow demostrations to be allowed here.... racial riots, hock lee bus riot...remember, the first generation of leaders in PAP are still in the parliment today...they hav seen more den us so definitely they would object to demostrations here and their words carry lots of weight......i personally feel that to a certain extent demostrations should be allowed but den wad the government tinks might not be the same as the citizens.....
maybe the future generations of our govenrment may change the laws....who noes....
Malaysia also was a British administered country, similar to Hong Kong and yet in these two countries political freedom is widely available to their respective Citizens than what is available to Singaporeans.
Whose History are you studying ?
The real history as happened, or the history that is written to fit into the shoe box objective of the Ruling Political Party ?
The racial riots also occurred in Malaysia, as it occurred in Singapore.
Must all political demonstrations lead to bloodshed and riots ?
This is the paranoic and myopic reasons for banning demonstrations and public display of any political beliefs.
This is part of the POLITICAL PROCESS of disenfranchising the political minds of Singaporeans - numb the minds and fill the stomachs, so that the Politicians have a free hand to do as they please.
Was there any effective protests in the passing of legislations that allow the Ruling Political Party to pay their Ministers the MILLION DOLLAR WAGE PROGRAM ?
A population of Singaporeans that is fully awaken to our Political Rights and actively exercising those rights can be troublesome to the Government aka the Ruling Political Party, who has gotten use to FORTY YEARS of unopposed rule, with little need to explain their actions, let alone their failures. -
I always fly Thai airways. Now Thailand wants to boycott Singapore goods because of Temasek buying Shin Corp, you people think I should stop flying Thai? Don't ask me to fly SIA, too expensive.
-
yes, hongkong n singapore are once ruled by the british, but i m sure u do noe dat hongkong was ONLY returned to china in 1997 while we gained our independence in 1965 (1959 for self-independence)...Originally posted by Atobe:If you remember history, Singapore was a British Colony, and was ruled by a British Colonial Government from 1819 till our own internal self-rule in 1951, and full independence through Malaysia in 1962.
Malaysia also was a British administered country, similar to Hong Kong and yet in these two countries political freedom is widely available to their respective Citizens than what is available to Singaporeans.
Whose History are you studying ?
The real history as happened, or the history that is written to fit into the shoe box objective of the Ruling Political Party ?
The racial riots also occurred in Malaysia, as it occurred in Singapore.
Must all political demonstrations lead to bloodshed and riots ?
This is the paranoic and myopic reasons for banning demonstrations and public display of any political beliefs.
This is part of the POLITICAL PROCESS of disenfranchising the political minds of Singaporeans - numb the minds and fill the stomachs, so that the Politicians have a free hand to do as they please.
Was there any effective protests in the passing of legislations that allow the Ruling Political Party to pay their Ministers the MILLION DOLLAR WAGE PROGRAM ?
A population of Singaporeans that is fully awaken to our Political Rights and actively exercising those rights can be troublesome to the Government aka the Ruling Political Party, who has gotten use to FORTY YEARS of unopposed rule, with little need to explain their actions, let alone their failures.
it doesnt matter whose history we are studying, as quoted by YOU dat the political party so called"wrote" the history in their own style......history are facts, nobody can runaway from it....if u dun mind, take a look at secondary 2 history textbook....the things and facts are similar to the history books that are written somewhere else or found on the internet....
the fact dat the freedom of speech and stuff like dat are not deeply incalcuated during the 60s....during the unstable times of 60s especially after independence and throughout the 70s, if government were to allow juz any demostrations, wouldnt the country be so unstable?........remeber, singapore has NO natural resources to fall on, we nid outside investments to help our economy.....again, dun compare us to hongkong, inthe 60s and 70s, hongkong IS STILL a british colony and dey hav the british to fall back on but do we hav??....
as for the MILLION DOLLAR WAGE programme, i admit dat our history textbook did nt runaway from stating dat ministers nid to be paid highly to prevent corruptions among the government....however nth much was emphasizec....but den u tink abt it this way, if our ministers wasnt paid so high, who will come and work for the government?....not many pple who are willing to do so......the the ministers' workload in our government i can say is relatively heavy.......if dey do a gd job, yes, a a taxpayer i wont mind the ministers get a high pay...n the fact is dat singapore now is a country with successful economy.....though dey r much more areas which nids improvement, yes, ministers are nt god and u do nid to give dem time...... -
what has CSJ done in the past few years,local and overseas?
Political work now takes up most of his time.
--Singapore opposition may be jailed for
He(CSJ) is the author of four books about politics and
another about parenting, and says he earns
an income by selling them on the street.
contempt of court,AFP,14 Mar 06 -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
Whether Singapore gained 'Internal Self Rule' in 1957 or Hong Kong returned to China in 1997 - the fact remained correct that British Influence was present in both these City States up until their respective 'Self Rule'.
yes, hongkong n singapore are once ruled by the british, but i m sure u do noe dat hongkong was ONLY returned to china in 1997 while we gained our independence in 1965 (1959 for self-independence)...
Are there any major differences between the development of these two cities - both lacking any natural resources except Human Ingenuity ?
Economically, Hong Kong and Singapore has little differences - except that the Hong Kong economic model feature a non-interventionist 'Government controls'; and a "distinctive feature in its flexible wage/price structure and self-regulating labor market" throughout its history - and which Singapore has only begun to emulate only after the economic crisis of 2002 with wage and job restructuring.
Prior to Singapore's 'Internal Self Rule' the Colonial Government had tolerated a fair amount of public 'peaceful' demonstrations, as was also the same in Hong Kong during the same period.
Why was the generous tolerance towards Public Demonstrations changed in Singapore from the late 1950s through 2006 ?
Is it not surprising that it was only after the return of Hong Kong to China that the laws were passed to change the official tolerance to public demonstrations were soon drafted ?
However, the marked difference in the Political Changes between Hong Kong and Singapore is the readiness of Hong Kong in applying International Standards of Human Rights by the Government - Tung Chee Hwa - for her people, compared to the monopolising of political power by the Ruling Political Party that controlled Singapore since 1957.:
Unfortunately, history can be re-written with a slant that mould young minds with 'new facts' - as evidenced by the efforts in Japan with their school history books being generously inaccurate in Japan's war time records.
it doesnt matter whose history we are studying, as quoted by YOU dat the political party so called"wrote" the history in their own style......history are facts, nobody can runaway from it....if u dun mind, take a look at secondary 2 history textbook....the things and facts are similar to the history books that are written somewhere else or found on the internet....
While the history books written for Singapore school did not reach similar ardent efforts at detailed inaccuracy, political history of Singapore seems to have been rewritten with ommissions and oblique references of other participating figures during the tumultous years leading to Singapore's independence.
With a government that can ban licensed newspaper simply for not following political guidelines, can we expect it to adhere to historical facts ?:
What were the events of the 1960s that were seen to be unstable ?
the fact dat the freedom of speech and stuff like dat are not deeply incalcuated during the 60s....during the unstable times of 60s especially after independence and throughout the 70s, if government were to allow juz any demostrations, wouldnt the country be so unstable?........remeber, singapore has NO natural resources to fall on, we nid outside investments to help our economy.....again, dun compare us to hongkong, inthe 60s and 70s, hongkong IS STILL a british colony and dey hav the british to fall back on but do we hav??....
Those years saw the tussle between the various political parties in preventing Singapore from merging with Malaysia - the tussle being fought between the main actors in the PAP and the Barisan Socialist, with supporting cast from an array of other political parties.
The early 1960s also saw the heated political debates between the PAP and the walk-out of Barisan Socialist from the Singapore Parliament, the heated exchanges between the PAP and UMNO branch in Singapore, the debate reported differently in the English Language Straits Times and the Malay Language Utusan Melayu.
With Indonesia Confrontasi campaign to fight against the successful merger of Malaysia, it was only logical that Public Demonstrations were banned during war time.
Will the British bail out Hong Kong in any big way - during the 1960s and 1970s - when the British Economy was being ripped apart, causing the Government of Harold Wilson to announce the 'withdrawal of the British Empire' from the Far East ?:
Did the Singapore history textbook for students include the reasons for Singapore Ministers' high wages ?
as for the MILLION DOLLAR WAGE programme, i admit dat our history textbook did nt runaway from stating dat ministers nid to be paid highly to prevent corruptions among the government....however nth much was emphasizec....but den u tink abt it this way, if our ministers wasnt paid so high, who will come and work for the government?....not many pple who are willing to do so......the the ministers' workload in our government i can say is relatively heavy.......if dey do a gd job, yes, a a taxpayer i wont mind the ministers get a high pay...n the fact is dat singapore now is a country with successful economy.....though dey r much more areas which nids improvement, yes, ministers are nt god and u do nid to give dem time......
Do we need to be surprised that the young minds need to be conditioned in its early age to accept highly paid ministers; and also to equate high wages to prevent corruptions ?
Are you aware that each Minister is supported by at least one or two Permanent Secretaries, with accompanying Deputy Permanent Secretaries, and Administrative Secretaries No 1 and-or No 2 ?
In some Ministries, the Minister will hold two portfolios and in each porfolio there will be a duplicate set of keys.
Is it necessary to "create work loads " to burden the Ministers ?
With the Ministers so burdened, can they still perform their tasks as Members of Parliament to serve their constituents ?
Is Singapore's economy a success, or is it a stack of card piled up - one on top of the other ?
Will the next economic sneeze affect the environment and spread 'death and destruction' to all ? -
wooosh ok........Originally posted by Atobe:Did the Singapore history textbook for students include the reasons for Singapore Ministers' high wages ?
Do we need to be surprised that the young minds need to be conditioned in its early age to accept highly paid ministers; and also to equate high wages to prevent corruptions ?
Are you aware that each Minister is supported by at least one or two Permanent Secretaries, with accompanying Deputy Permanent Secretaries, and Administrative Secretaries No 1 and-or No 2 ?
In some Ministries, the Minister will hold two portfolios and in each porfolio there will be a duplicate set of keys.
Is it necessary to "create work loads " to burden the Ministers ?
With the Ministers so burdened, can they still perform their tasks as Members of Parliament to serve their constituents ?
Is Singapore's economy a success, or is it a stack of card piled up - one on top of the other ?
Will the next economic sneeze affect the environment and spread 'death and destruction' to all ?
nice arguments.....
but u see, no system is a perfect one......dere are bound to be loopholes in every system.....singapore's press freedom is ranked one of the last few if nt wrong....i maybe a bit materialistic but our economy has been quite ok......dere will always be a nid to press fer changes but tink abt it, nt every country can fit into one system....this can be traced back to each country's histories and geographical facts....
see wad happens when u keep toking abt press n speech freedom, the recent cartoon controversie in europe has caused so much uproar in the middle east, no respect for other's religion.....and yet in a multi-religion country like singapore, u cant afford to hav such a thing happening.......
somehow, i tink dere is a indirect link between politics and racial issues.....
PAP propaganda?.....no comments but singapore now is still a relatively stable country.....
maybe u may wan to take a look into upper secondary's textbook and tell me how u feel =)......... -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
While no system can be a perfect one, at least any other system that is based on some International Standards of Human Development will be better than the present 'monopolistic grip' by the POWER OF ONE in all spheres of Human Endeavours in Singapore.
wooosh ok........
nice arguments.....
but u see, no system is a perfect one......dere are bound to be loopholes in every system.....singapore's press freedom is ranked one of the last few if nt wrong....i maybe a bit materialistic but our economy has been quite ok......dere will always be a nid to press fer changes but tink abt it, nt every country can fit into one system....this can be traced back to each country's histories and geographical facts....
see wad happens when u keep toking abt press n speech freedom, the recent cartoon controversie in europe has caused so much uproar in the middle east, no respect for other's religion.....and yet in a multi-religion country like singapore, u cant afford to hav such a thing happening.......
somehow, i tink dere is a indirect link between politics and racial issues.....
PAP propaganda?.....no comments but singapore now is still a relatively stable country.....
maybe u may wan to take a look into upper secondary's textbook and tell me how u feel =).........
Let us not complicate the discussion with the recent 'cartoonic events' that is basically a result of a determined behaviour of a small group of ambitious politicians disguised as 'fanatical zealots' that is bent on achieving their Political Agenda by any means - religious, racial, communal, political - so as to stoke up the irrational behaviour of the larger group of less sophisticated, lesser educated masses.
The politics and racial characteristics of Malaysia is about the closest that one can find to qualify some comparison to be made with Singapore.
Malaysia also has a miulti-racial community as Singapore - although the ethnic composition ratio maybe different in the respective country, there is little difference in diet, languages, ethnic nuances, culture and traditions.
Yet we can see in Malaysia, a high level of tolerance towards dissenting voices, opposition politics, alternative views from Non-Government Organisations, and a more generous propensity towards mistaken remarks.
With the same set of laws left behind by the British Colonial Government, the Malaysian have opted for a more liberal form of democracy.
Can this be said of Singapore ?
Intolerance and impatience is the hallmark of the Singapore Ruling Elites towards all with dissenting and opposing views.
Is Singapore stable, or is it in a constant state of flux, held together by the constant admonition of the Citizens to tow the line, or risk Singapore being collapsed into the outer sea. -
Opposition parties must always remember that for most Singaporeans, it is prosperity first, democracy second...
-
The problem now is that prosperity for many is not forthcoming despite their best efforts. I don't think Singaporeans just want to voice out for the sake of making noise, but it has come to a point whereby the people at the top is not listening to the people they are supposed to serve.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Opposition parties must always remember that for most Singaporeans, it is prosperity first, democracy second...
And there is this perception on the ground that the government is not doing anything other than accumulating reserves for all sorts of reasons except helping the people.
The government already said it all when they said they will not help Singaporeans in times of need but only when there is a budget surplus. Apparently, helping the poor, less fortunate Singaporeans is not about duty but rather based on dollars and cents.
When times are bad, why can't a little of the reserves be used to help Singaporeans through the bad patch? Isn't that what the reserves are for in the first place?
Or has the reserves become a piggy bank just for overseas shopping sprees?
Even if overseas investments generate a huge return, would these money ever be used to help Singaporeans, since seemingly the reserves cannot be touched at all?
So who benefits from money that rightfully belongs to Singaporeans?
-
we shall not complicate the situation but den it is basically the same thing.....Originally posted by Atobe:While no system can be a perfect one, at least any other system that is based on some International Standards of Human Development will be better than the present 'monopolistic grip' by the POWER OF ONE in all spheres of Human Endeavours in Singapore.
Let us not complicate the discussion with the recent 'cartoonic events' that is basically a result of a determined behaviour of a small group of ambitious politicians disguised as 'fanatical zealots' that is bent on achieving their Political Agenda by any means - religious, racial, communal, political - so as to stoke up the irrational behaviour of the larger group of less sophisticated, lesser educated masses.
The politics and racial characteristics of Malaysia is about the closest that one can find to qualify some comparison to be made with Singapore.
Malaysia also has a miulti-racial community as Singapore - although the ethnic composition ratio maybe different in the respective country, there is little difference in diet, languages, ethnic nuances, culture and traditions.
Yet we can see in Malaysia, a high level of tolerance towards dissenting voices, opposition politics, alternative views from Non-Government Organisations, and a more generous propensity towards mistaken remarks.
With the same set of laws left behind by the British Colonial Government, the Malaysian have opted for a more liberal form of democracy.
Can this be said of Singapore ?
Intolerance and impatience is the hallmark of the Singapore Ruling Elites towards all with dissenting and opposing views.
Is Singapore stable, or is it in a constant state of flux, held together by the constant admonition of the Citizens to tow the line, or risk Singapore being collapsed into the outer sea.
malaysia??........look at it this way, and i hav emphasized this again n again, look at the country size of malaysia, it is many times bigger den singapore. one city having demostrations wont not affect reallie much and spread to the rest of the country, n certainly not reallie causing too much trouble.....but in singapore, singapore is sooo many times smaller den malaysia!!!.....juz tink, a demostration in orchard road would reallie spread to the whole singapore, given in today's technology n media, news spread fast n wildy.....wad would happen if the whole country juz fall into a crisis.......we simply juz cannot afford to hav the whole country down.....
now look, i am nt defending the government but i juz feel dat dere are reasons behind certain actions taken by the government.....no doubt dere might be some political reasons behind, dat i dunnoe, but den wad a government can do is to keep a country stable n life of its citizen stable........we hav elections dun we?.......... -
Originally posted by hiphop2009:
If you will care to discern - 'Demonstrations' can be in many forms and do not necessarily always need to be the violent and destructive types as has always been the well used reason by the Singapore Government aka the present Ruling Political Party to prevent any public expression of protests.
we shall not complicate the situation but den it is basically the same thing.....
malaysia??........look at it this way, and i hav emphasized this again n again, look at the country size of malaysia, it is many times bigger den singapore. one city having demostrations wont not affect reallie much and spread to the rest of the country, n certainly not reallie causing too much trouble.....but in singapore, singapore is sooo many times smaller den malaysia!!!.....juz tink, a demostration in orchard road would reallie spread to the whole singapore, given in today's technology n media, news spread fast n wildy.....wad would happen if the whole country juz fall into a crisis.......we simply juz cannot afford to hav the whole country down.....
now look, i am nt defending the government but i juz feel dat dere are reasons behind certain actions taken by the government.....no doubt dere might be some political reasons behind, dat i dunnoe, but den wad a government can do is to keep a country stable n life of its citizen stable........we hav elections dun we?..........
Malaysia maybe a MILLION TIMES bigger than Singapore but you should not doubt that in the event of a political spark being purpose lighted by some ambitiously mischevious politician, that spark can easily spread like wild fire across the entire country.
It was proven in the racial riots of 1963 that spread from Kuala Lumpur, across to other cities and into Singapore almost within TWENTY-FOUR HOURS.
However, the recent demonstration in support of their 'disgraced' DPM Anwar Ibrahim was peaceful until the Riot Police stepped in to forcibly disperse the gathering crowd, resulting in a running battle into the outskirts of the city.
Being small has its advantage, in that any problem that arise can be contained better in Singapore then in Malaysia.
In Singapore, demonstrations are only allowed WHEN ORGANISED by the Ruling Political Party a.k.a the Singapore Government - as when NTUC Lim Boon Heng led a highly publicised demonstration drive pass protests at the previous US Embassy on Hill Street during the late 1980s.
The reason for not allowing demonstrations in Singapore is to suppress any chance of a revival of any PRO-ACTIVE POLITICAL SPIRIT that can be INFECTIOUSLY instilled in the present safely desensitised Singaporeans towards Politics.
The reasons given are laudably simple and materially centered - with arguments such as instability result in economic disintegration, poverty, and destruction - all are expressions of past experiences from the Communist inspired destructive protests in the late 1950s in protests against Colonial Government Policies.
Those kind of destructive demonstrations had occurred when there was nothing to lose during the early struggles against unfair and unreasonable Colonial Policies.
Those 1950s environment do not occur in the present day Singapore, and surely Singaporeans today are not stupid to embark on any form of extreme or destructive demonstrations that cause any loss to properties and life.
Surely, the present day Singaporeans are better educated, more worldly wise, and alot more sophisticated then those Singaporean adults of the late 1950s ?
Public Demonstrations is an extension of our Political Rights to express our dissent towards a Government that do not listen or respond to the people who elect them to Public Office.
Shutting down our Rights to Demonstrate is tantamount to renegading on the clearly written and expressed boundaries of the Rights of Singaporeans as enshrined in the Singapore Constitution. -
Atobe,
If you really believe that Malaysia is a better country to demonstrate in than Singapore, Please Do go ahead and travel there to protest your claims on Us here. You will generate Headlines in ALL Malaysian Papers and we will read about you and your bravery against Singapore's Lack of Human Rights.
Malaysia is DIFFERENT from Singapore. They have a Bumiputra policy. Do we have a similar policy under official Governmental Laws? Do we Exclude the poor muslims/indians from "election shares?" Do we say that a Chinese must be co-owner of a company? Simply if you are SO against our lack of rights, join the Opposition parties! You are definitely Fired up enough to campaign!
You CAN Hold a silent Protest by yourself Walking around the Istana holding up a big board stating our lack of rights. The police will look at you. The reporters will notice and interview you and you will not be Arrested as long as you dont yell/run amok/turn streaker.
Now i'm waiting. -
Silkair is oso under SIAOriginally posted by countdracula:csj may be an idiot but then again, what has sia done for singaporeans? they don't sponsor anything really...their ticket prices are not local friendly...their services are geared towards the ang mohs...u want to fly, go take silkair.......