i think all Singaporeans must practise critical thinking and not accept everything the govt or 140th says without questioning.
Scholars
A reduced, changing force
A different lot today, theyÂ’re more individualistic and diverse compred to previous ones who shared objectives with political leadership.
By Seah Chiang Nee, littlespeck.com
Oct 1, 2006
The process of reducing the large number of government scholarships every year seems to have started - by as much as half in some ministries.
Mr. Lee Kuan Yew had announced some time ago this would free up some academically bright graduates to become entrepreneurs (unmentioned: probably also because too many were breaking bonds.)
But some observers feel that there may be another reason.
The current new breed of scholars is a lot different from the smaller, exclusive number which shared the PeopleÂ’s Action PartyÂ’s political objectives (not all of them remains unchanged) in the early days.
Today they are more numerous, diverse, individualistic and less enthusiastic to follow the PAPÂ’s political line. Some are sympathetic to the opposition parties.
Mr. Lee must be worried that there could come a time when instead of serving his party’s goals, they will work for the Workers Party or other parties – after completing their bonds, of course.
Many dissidents will probably be tempted to remain in the bureaucracy by either the high office or high wages – but not all. The others could spurn them to follow their own political inclinations.
To have even a few bright sparks – the best academic minds of the land - to join the opposition and work against the PAP will not be acceptable to its leadership, especially when they have been trained on a system started by it.
Former senior civil servant, Ngiam Tong Dow put if very frankly several years ago: “So far, the PAP's tactic is to put all the scholars into the civil service because it believes the way to retain political power forever is to have a monopoly on talent. To me, that's a very short-term view."
He continued, “If you want to challenge the Government, it must be spontaneous. You have to allow some of your best and brightest to remain outside your reach and let them grow spontaneously.
”How do you know their leadership will not be as good as yours? But if you monopolise all the talent, there will never be an alternative leadership. And alternatives are good for Singapore."
”This is where we need to appreciate understand that the future of this country is very much dependent on the model that we choose.. A two-party state is the minimum, anything less and we are playing with fire.
”Meritocracy fueled the single party model and it does sound warm and nice. A single party unfortunately needs to be led and the assumption is the leader is always going to be good. This is where the model begins to fall.
“Putting all your eggs in one basket has never been a good idea even to housewife out marketing for the family.” (end quote)
This is especially true if they are sycophants, pretenders and blindly follow orders to further their own career promotion.
Having too many of them would be disastrous for the future of Singapore, something the PAP leaders must have pondered over.
So how far will scholar-bureaucrats prepare to disobey political or other directives that they disagree with?
The answer is a general “Not much as long as they remain in the service.”
Many will implement them against their own conscience. A few will leave in protest or even join the opposition and speak out against the government, but all are likely to follow orders as long as they are in service. ThatÂ’s the culture.
Some self-questioning has already begun privately.
In ‘Confession of a scholar’ Singapore scholar police, blogger Kitana said:
“I fear that I will be one of those being compelled to maintain Singapore’s ‘public order’ by cracking down on possible dissidents or actions of similar political implications.
“I believe that the police is a force that serves the nation, that we serve to maintain order and security, not for the good of any one party, but for the good of the citizens as a whole.
“We work within the confines of the law and we serve to uphold the law. But sometimes the way the law itself is being used a justification for actions with very vague moral and legal boundaries, it worries me that I will be forced to make a call or an order that I don’t want to.
“And I fear that it will come to that, because my idealism is being tested with every article and picture I see.”