Violinist not allowed to defer NS
-
I'm in favour of letting him defer, period.
-
I think everyone should serve their two years already then talk. It should not even be a contested topic...
Make it mandatory to serve your two years after you finish your ITE/JC/Poly then you go ahead and do what you want. Or at least serve like 1.5years before u can disrupt. It would be fair to everyone after all. -
How shall i answer such an innocent question?Originally posted by Fatum:have you ever served NS before ? ...
Yes? -
well then ... you smoked me with your profile then ... but nevermind, say you did then ...Originally posted by BillyBong:How shall i answer such an innocent question? Yes? 
the reason I asked that question, is because I want to make sure that you understand that kind of sacrifice that NSmen make ... surely you remember the burnt weekends prowling around a camp somewhere, or doing life firing exercises .....
now I don't want to go on ranting here, it's not about wanting other people to suffer and step through the same turd that we did, and perhaps for me personally, it's not just about equality alone ...
every society, every nation, requires and extracts some price for citizenship, and taking up arms to defend his or her nation, is a very elemental and fundamental expression of that, the fact that certain other societies does not extract such a price at this particular moment in time, does not mean that such a requirement doesn't exist, the exigencies of the geo-political realities of our region is such that this price is a neccessary burden for our society, nobody likes to run around in the jungle carrying a rifle, and no goverment likes to spend money on something so intangible in peace ... defence exerts such a heavy price on any society, economically and socially, no ? ... but of course, as you've pointed out, it's not about absconding from NS, but about deferment , right ? ...
as Mushroom has pointed out, the system would fail if it the policy is not applied equally to everyone, no ? ... where do we draw the line then ? ... as the bear has pointed out ? ... you know, personally, I think the powers-that-be and the bureaucrats have been quite flexible to many individual cases already, I remember reading about some chaps being granted a deferrment of several months to participate in an online gaming competition (personal view on that case :
) ...
I think, as I've posted, it's not about us being afraid of loosing the next beethoven or mozart ... (or even vanessa mae ! ) ... the society doesn't really care about that, no body in Singapore would starve if this chap turns out to be the next big thing ... nor is mindef going to miss one particular rifleman gone off to twang a few strings ... but simply put, doesn't it make a mockery of the rest of us who has put in our time, paid our dues (and some of us with our very lives ? ... remember the drowned sniper, rest his soul ? ) ... it's not about him or his talents here, but the system ... each of us has our "first loves" too, to quote you, but so many of us has interrupted our lives and put our goals and aspirations on hold to fulfil this obligation, should he be an exception ?
and to reply to the qst_08 chap, I shall use a very simple analogy, something I've put across twice here, sure, we are protecting the assets of some foreigners and perhaps even some fat cats elites, but let's say if the groundfloor of your HDB flat catches fire, are you going to stand idly by and do nothing because you'd be saving the properties of your hated neighbour too ? ... (can read more of that here http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=182016)
perhaps I'm something of a blinkered idealist, but I believe in having a stake in the society that one is living in, it need not be Singapore, it can be any other country or society that one feel is better able to fulfil one's aspirations, lifestyles, dreams, whatever (heck, to be honest, I've been thinking of that myself, for I'm starting to love the society that I'm currently living in right now) by all means, go ahead, I'd wish him the very best in his new life, for we cannot choose the country of our birth, but we can certainly choose the country that we love, no ? ... but don't every look back, embrace and entrench yourself in the society that you want to spend the rest of your life in ... I like to think that one should always be prepared to pay the price of that society's citizenship, for otherwise, you'd be nothing but a leach, feeding off that society, no ? ... it's a hard thing to accept in this day and age of course, but that's where I stand ... -
well....he dun have much choice already...sometimes we have to do it the drastic.....awol and go for curtis whatever...Originally posted by liang1972:In today's newspaper, the violinist is not allowed to defer NS and his family is appealing. I find that Mindef is rigid and it is not often that we can get talented musicians who are accepted by prestigious Curtis.
I hope that Mindef can approve his deferment. All this gun handling in NS can blunt his skills in violin playing after two years.
-
It's good to acknowledge fellow idealists and their views, for we are a dying breed nowadays. Most just want to move along, put food on the table and enjoy safety and security as a whole.Originally posted by Fatum:well then ... you smoked me with your profile then ... but nevermind, say you did then ...
the reason I asked that question, is because I want to make sure that you understand that kind of sacrifice that NSmen make ... surely you remember the burnt weekends prowling around a camp somewhere, or doing life firing exercises .....
now I don't want to go on ranting here, it's not about wanting other people to suffer and step through the same turd that we did, and perhaps for me personally, it's not just about equality alone ...
every society, every nation, requires and extracts some price for citizenship, and taking up arms to defend his or her nation, is a very elemental and fundamental expression of that, the fact that certain other societies does not extract such a price at this particular moment in time, does not mean that such a requirement doesn't exist, the exigencies of the geo-political realities of our region is such that this price is a neccessary burden for our society, nobody likes to run around in the jungle carrying a rifle, and no goverment likes to spend money on something so intangible in peace ... defence exerts such a heavy price on any society, economically and socially, no ? ... but of course, as you've pointed out, it's not about absconding from NS, but about deferment , right ? ...
as Mushroom has pointed out, the system would fail if it the policy is not applied equally to everyone, no ? ... where do we draw the line then ? ... as the bear has pointed out ? ... you know, personally, I think the powers-that-be and the bureaucrats have been quite flexible to many individual cases already, I remember reading about some chaps being granted a deferrment of several months to participate in an online gaming competition (personal view on that case : ) ...
I think, as I've posted, it's not about us being afraid of loosing the next beethoven or mozart ... (or even vanessa mae ! ) ... the society doesn't really care about that, no body in Singapore would starve if this chap turns out to be the next big thing ... nor is mindef going to miss one particular rifleman gone off to twang a few strings ... but simply put, doesn't it make a mockery of the rest of us who has put in our time, paid our dues (and some of us with our very lives ? ... remember the drowned sniper, rest his soul ? ) ... it's not about him or his talents here, but the system ... each of us has our "first loves" too, to quote you, but so many of us has interrupted our lives and put our goals and aspirations on hold to fulfil this obligation, should he be an exception ?
and to reply to the qst_08 chap, I shall use a very simple analogy, something I've put across twice here, sure, we are protecting the assets of some foreigners and perhaps even some fat cats elites, but let's say if the groundfloor of your HDB flat catches fire, are you going to stand idly by and do nothing because you'd be saving the properties of your hated neighbour too ? ... (can read more of that here http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=182016)
perhaps I'm something of a blinkered idealist, but I believe in having a stake in the society that one is living in, it need not be Singapore, it can be any other country or society that one feel is better able to fulfil one's aspirations, lifestyles, dreams, whatever (heck, to be honest, I've been thinking of that myself, for I'm starting to love the society that I'm currently living in right now) by all means, go ahead, I'd wish him the very best in his new life, for we cannot choose the country of our birth, but we can certainly choose the country that we love, no ? ... but don't every look back, embrace and entrench yourself in the society that you want to spend the rest of your life in ... I like to think that one should always be prepared to pay the price of that society's citizenship, for otherwise, you'd be nothing but a leach, feeding off that society, no ? ... it's a hard thing to accept in this day and age of course, but that's where I stand ...
It's a good point that you have raised, and as other forumites have likewise argued: When does the buck stop?
If we are indeed to have equality, then what rules should apply across the board? Should we be completely devoid of feelings and emotions when we make decisions to maintain an impartiality? Wouldn't that effectively deprive us of what we are: Humans? Remember even presiding judges who pass sentence during court consider first, the mitigating circumstances governing the case. Conversely, no penalty is definitive without deliberation.
The first reaction of some people upon hearing about the case is of course, sympathy. Why should we deprive a potential genius an opportunity of a lifetime because of some bureaucracy? This is a person's life we're talking about and possibly his future career! Who are we as outsiders to interfere and tell him what's right and what's not? Play GOD so to speak?
Alas, there is also the flip side of people, who do not consider the circumstances but prefer to rigidly adhere to the LAW and their self-proclaimed SENSE OF DUTY, that is to serve NATIONAL SERVICE.
It is not my place to say who is right in their views. But i must point out that everyone has to look at 2 key aspects before making any rash comments:
1. The prestigious scholarship offered by the Curtis Institute of Music is a rare opportunity; only the truly gifted are granted a place.
2. Ike is asking for a deferment, NOT a DISCHARGE OF DUTY.
At this point, put aside your views of promoting world-class, NS Equality, elitism etc.
Focus only on the case itself.
And all you will see is a gifted individual pleading for a chance.
Now ask yourself: Is that truly too much to ask for? -
If he so talented then what difference between going there now or after. To be fair to every single NS men that have wanted to defer but not being allowed to do so, he should not have that type of priviledge.
How do you compare one type of talent over the other and which is superior. Its just too bad and its a hurdle he must overcome. His duty is to the country and not the country's duty to ensure that he will have a smooth ride in life.
Sounds cruel or unfair? well tell that to me when I am the one in the jungle and someone is happily in some air-con hostel living the life.
Unless you go through NS or am doing it now you have no idea. -
Originally posted by BillyBong:
NS tampers with everyone's life. He is not the only one affected. Allowing an isolated case will set precedence for others.
It's good to acknowledge fellow idealists and their views, for we are a dying breed nowadays. Most just want to move along, put food on the table and enjoy safety and security as a whole.
It's a good point that you have raised, and as other forumites have likewise argued: When does the buck stop?
If we are indeed to have equality, then what rules should apply across the board? Should we be completely devoid of feelings and emotions when we make decisions to maintain an impartiality? Wouldn't that effectively deprive us of what we are: Humans? Remember even presiding judges who pass sentence during court consider first, the mitigating circumstances governing the case. Conversely, no penalty is definitive without deliberation.
The first reaction of some people upon hearing about the case is of course, sympathy. Why should we deprive a potential genius an opportunity of a lifetime because of some bureaucracy? This is a person's life we're talking about and possibly his future career! Who are we as outsiders to interfere and tell him what's right and what's not? Play GOD so to speak?
Alas, there is also the flip side of people, who do not consider the circumstances but prefer to rigidly adhere to the [b]LAW and their self-proclaimed SENSE OF DUTY, that is to serve NATIONAL SERVICE.
It is not my place to say who is right in their views. But i must point out that everyone has to look at 2 key aspects before making any rash comments:
1. The prestigious scholarship offered by the Curtis Institute of Music is a rare opportunity; only the truly gifted are granted a place.
2. Ike is asking for a deferment, NOT a DISCHARGE OF DUTY.
At this point, put aside your views of promoting world-class, NS Equality, elitism etc.
Focus only on the case itself.
And all you will see is a gifted individual pleading for a chance.
Now ask yourself: Is that truly too much to ask for?
[/b]
To give allowance for one talent will set in motion another 'talent' to exploit this situation.
Singapore lacks the human resource to facilitate an army to defend itself, and Singapore's failure will be a responsibility of every citizen.
To allow one, but not another, shows preferential treatment. To allow citizens to choose their serving time for ns further decimates the numbers of able-blooded males that can defend the nation when the need arises.
Perhaps the shortage is not appalling to you but it will be for officers, commanders. -
No wonder the talented and the smartest are leaving Singapore for else where simply Singapore does not allow them to succeed....
Only the 2nd grade foreign talent( those not considered to be good in their own homeland) are invited to Singapore to fill up the jobs which we had make our talents leave for... Great Job Singapore!!! All the talent just go ahead leave Singapore to the bunch of mediocore citizen and foreign talents... -
'White Horses' have got a better deal serving NS compared to other Singaporeans.
If Ike - the Violinist - is from this special stock that place him apart from the other less privileged Singaporeans, he could have cut a deal without too much publicity.
Unless he is afraid of injuring his fingers, or straining a muscle that will affect the light touch that playing a violin will need ? -
Hello? This opportunity may not come again! It's like thrusting a once-in-a-lifetime job opportunity on your lap and asking you to mull it over.Originally posted by jianfish9:If he so talented then what difference between going there now or after. To be fair to every single NS men that have wanted to defer but not being allowed to do so, he should not have that type of priviledge.
How do you compare one type of talent over the other and which is superior. Its just too bad and its a hurdle he must overcome. His duty is to the country and not the country's duty to ensure that he will have a smooth ride in life.
Sounds cruel or unfair? well tell that to me when I am the one in the jungle and someone is happily in some air-con hostel living the life.
Unless you go through NS or am doing it now you have no idea.
You think the Curtis Institute of Music is going to say: ok, we'll hold a place for you after your 2 yr conscription?
You presume too much!
And like you said, he can very well perform his duty now or later...so why not later? Since when does 'suffering' your Temburong Training or ATEC Evaluation give you the zealot RIGHT to inflict your angst on others?
-
Evidently, you fail to grasp the definition of deferment.Originally posted by Nelstar:NS tampers with everyone's life. He is not the only one affected. Allowing an isolated case will set precedence for others.
To give allowance for one talent will set in motion another 'talent' to exploit this situation.
Singapore lacks the human resource to facilitate an army to defend itself, and Singapore's failure will be a responsibility of every citizen.
To allow one, but not another, shows preferential treatment. To allow citizens to choose their serving time for ns further decimates the numbers of able-blooded males that can defend the nation when the need arises.
Perhaps the shortage is not appalling to you but it will be for officers, commanders.
All of you seem to think that this is a common case with a common set of circumstances. Were that so, i'm sure Ike wouldn't have bothered with his request.
Is there any reason why the govt has had to rely on an army of foreign talents in SG? We are denying our own people the chance to be truly great by tying them down on technicalities.
And they label them quitters....
-
Many others have missed similar opportunities as well. You still fail to understand the importance of dealing fairly and seem to champion an elitist approach.Originally posted by BillyBong:Hello? This opportunity may not come again! It's like thrusting a once-in-a-lifetime job opportunity on your lap and asking you to mull it over.
As a contributor mentioned in the ST forum page, there are many others who have more pressing needs to defer NS...only breadwinner of the family, sick parents, young children etc...
The rule must be applied to all. I think a better system would be one that allows everyone to choose when to serve within the window of 18-30 years old. Alternatively, allow everyone who apply for deferment to defer with the usual bank guarantees but to discourage abuse, those who defer have to serve a longer period, say, 6 months to 1 year more. -
While i accept fair and equal treatment to all, i do not see how allowing DEFERMENT to a gifted individual constitutes to elitism.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Many others have missed similar opportunities as well. You still fail to understand the importance of dealing fairly and seem to champion an elitist approach.
As a contributor mentioned in the ST forum page, there are many others who have more pressing needs to defer NS...only breadwinner of the family, sick parents, young children etc...
The rule must be applied to all. I think a better system would be one that allows everyone to choose when to serve within the window of 18-30 years old. Alternatively, allow everyone who apply for deferment to defer with the usual bank guarantees but to discourage abuse, those who defer have to serve a longer period, say, 6 months to 1 year more.
In your eyes, must deferment = preferential treatment = elitism? You seem to forget that attenuating circumstances should apply on a case by case basis.
Does a doctor prescribe the EXACT SAME medicine to different patients with the exact same symptoms? Or does a doctor exercise his prerogative and assess the patient on an individual basis, allowing for higher or lower dosages, depending on the patient's resilience to medication?
If the rules are absolute and inflexible, how will society grow? How many people's lives and opportunities must be sacrificed for the proclaimed GREATER GOOD?
Service will continue, he will be back to serve, unless you equate all upcoming musical talents in singapore as potential defaulters. -
Actually they are. Once you allow them out of the country they are potential defaulters.Originally posted by BillyBong:Service will continue, he will be back to serve, unless you equate all upcoming musical talents in singapore as potential defaulters. -
Originally posted by BillyBong:
e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-)
While i accept fair and equal treatment to all, i do not see how allowing [b]DEFERMENT to a gifted individual constitutes to elitism.
[/b]
n.
The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
You allow a 'gifted individual' deferment because of his superior talent, whilst the same privilege is not afforded to others judged to be less gifted, that is elitism. -
I fail to understand why he should be given preferential treatment over other citizens who might contribute more to the country's building process.Originally posted by BillyBong:Evidently, you fail to grasp the definition of deferment.
All of you seem to think that this is a common case with a common set of circumstances. Were that so, i'm sure Ike wouldn't have bothered with his request.
Is there any reason why the govt has had to rely on an army of foreign talents in SG? We are denying our own people the chance to be truly great by tying them down on technicalities.
And they label them quitters....
I fail to understand why you don't understand that giving someone deferment due to talent or gift is showing favoritism/elitism/preferential treatment and this creates a stage for conflicts. -
Well, I guess my question here will be the most common question asked by SAF. How can you ensure that he will be back to serve? All upcoming musical talents in singapore may not be potential defaulters, but every person who is allowed to defer their NS for overseas studies is a potential defaulter. Nobody is saying that the violin boy is definitely going to default, but there will be factors that may lead to the higher possibilities of defaulting when he is over there.Originally posted by BillyBong:Service will continue, he will be back to serve, unless you equate all upcoming musical talents in singapore as potential defaulters.
I am not green-eyed over his chance to go overseas for his education as I too have been there and done that after serving my NS without any deferment or disruption. The issue is that now that the regulations have been tightened why should he be an exception to let him defer?
To most of us, it probably doesn't matter much if he turns out to be a great musician. All we want is fairness, equality in dealing with this issue, is it too much to ask for? We pulled in our fair amount of effort in protecting this country before we even go for our higher education that is also important for our career. By letting violin boy defer, isn't that as good as telling the rest of us that our own future is less important than his? Tell us, how is this justified?
If he is really good at his music, he should not find any problem in developing his skills elsewhere. If his music talent can't even stand the test of time, then perhaps he may like to reconsider if making music is his future. -
What about a talented footballer who has been offered a place at the Bobby Charlton School in Manchester? Should he be allowed to defer NS?
-
Clearly the risk of defulting is there. Which is why the Ministry of Defence has upped the bond and criteria respectively.Originally posted by dakkon_blackblade:Actually they are. Once you allow them out of the country they are potential defaulters.
At some point, other than a binding contract, all you have is the person's word. If the bond is broken and he refuses to come home, it will bring shame to the family and his name, leaving the burden of cost to the parents, a rather despicable thing to do, agree? -
I view elitism or 'elite' as a group of individuals who, through birth status or inherited power, consider themselves several rungs up the ladder, and manipulate their considerable influence to shape factors to their benefit. Compared to the peasants, they are afforded special privileges (or unfair advantages) that flow with their position.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-)
n.
The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
You allow a 'gifted individual' deferment because of his superior talent, whilst the same privilege is not afforded to others judged to be less gifted, that is elitism.
These people do not necessarily have specific talents, but are a group with deep pockets or with political connections, allowing them to leapfrog over the rest.
In Ike's case, it's natural talent, and musically-inclined too. A 'gifted individual' does not equate to a 'superior status', nor does it imply elitism. If potential doctors are afforded this deferment in lieu of medical studies, does that imply they are elite as well?
Again, it should be judged on a case by case basis, and not presided upon by a blanket law that covers absolute rule. No law can function if managed in such a rigid manner. -
Must our thinking remain as straight as an arrow? Aren't we taught to think 'out of the box'?Originally posted by Nelstar:I fail to understand why he should be given preferential treatment over other citizens who might contribute more to the country's building process.
I fail to understand why you don't understand that giving someone deferment due to talent or gift is showing favoritism/elitism/preferential treatment and this creates a stage for conflicts.
Why must we adhere to absolute law, where there can be no hope of reprieve or moderation despite circumstances?
Have we become so enraged by a single defaulter that we see only what we want to see and completely neglect the mitigating factors?
You fail to understand why Ike should be given preferential treatment over 'others who might contribute more to nation building'. Perhaps you care to explain what you term by 'other contributions'? Are you suggesting that improving the music and arts scene is of negligible importance then? Why do we bother with a MINISTER FOR INFORMATION AND THE ARTS then?
Why can't you consider the fact that deferment does not = elitism? How on earth did elitism get bestowed on people who defer NS?
I'm not sure whether people who are dead against the idea of deferment are still reeling from the effects of the Melvyn Tan case. In that sense, i hope it's not resentment by association. -
Its Singapore's loss anyway....let him go...I'm in favor of nurturing our talents....no point holding him back.
-
If Korea, a nation technically still at war, can have a period of enlistment lasting a decade, there is no reason why we cannot..
No one is exempting him from NS, and will it cause anyone sleepless nights if he enlists at 27?Sure, he will enlist now at 19 and probably leave for greener pastures after he has ORDed, knowing there is nothing here worth serving for.
Artistic types have very long memory, you cast them out once, and they will remember you for life.
Somehow, if we are to keep our talents here, better show them that we value them.We have penalties, we are supposed to gravitate to being a developed society, but all I see are witch-hunts appearing once more.
Ask yourselves if you put on your uniform to defend narrowminded interests or to create a society where pluralism exists.I'm more inclined to think I served my time so that others may have the privilege to grow in their own way safely.
But sadly, most people cannot grasp the concept of real service. -
I agree.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:I'm in favour of letting him defer, period.
And we have one serving soldier and a NSman here who can think more liberally..
so there.