Draconian law has its benefits
-
draconian laws are basic for a country in the development stages.
i would recommmend it for china. where ppl are rich but lack of respect for others and regulation.
we singaporeans has pass that stage and over doing it, will make singapore a mockery in international stage.
-
the problem that australia is facing is because of.... foreign talents.
the chinese go there, set up store and form chinese gangs. that was one of the legitimate reasons that they hate asians. a few years back, the australian came over to invite retiring police to go over there and join their police. it is generally easier for chinese cops to deal with chinese gangs.
So remember, foreign talents comes in all shapes and sizes.
-
Originally posted by reyes:
draconian laws are basic for a country in the development stages.
i would recommmend it for china. where ppl are rich but lack of respect for others and regulation.
we singaporeans has pass that stage and over doing it, will make singapore a mockery in international stage.
the current president Hu r taking a conservative approach, with can be rooted in ancient china, emphasize on harmony, Draconian law is not basic for a country in any stage, in ancient time, there is once the approached is being adopted, somehow it foster the strength of the country, but it cannot sustain the prosperity -
regression to zero.
let's go back to monarchy!
god save the queen (LHL)!!!
-
the current president Hu r taking a conservative approach, with can be rooted in ancient china, emphasize on harmony, Draconian law is not basic for a country in any stage, in ancient time, there is once the approached is being adopted, somehow it foster the strength of the country, but it cannot sustain the prosperity
i am not sure whether iron fist treatment in tibet is consider harmonous. anyway, Hu does not concern about draconia laws. such petty issues are normally handle by province state govt.
deportation of because prostitution is consider draconia? at least we dont have to worry about it in singapore than in china.
-
TS should really answer this question...
If Draconian law is really the basis for security... and given the fact that Singapore is a small nation that is vastly easier to police then other nations...
Why then it is NOT the safest nation in the world?
In fact, let's look at a list of the SAFER nations then Singapore:
Top 5 Safest Countries in the World
Top 5 Countries Where Safety is First
To balance out the notorious compilation of Top 5 Most Dangerous Countries in the World, the safest countries on the globe were analyzed. Crime is virtually nonexistent or very rare. Consequently, the quality of life is higher in safer countries and the people live longer. According to the Global Peace Index, the following are countries where you don't have to watch your back.
5. Japan. Though some may argue against this saying that Japan does not report all of its crime to officials, it is safe to say (no pun intended) that it is a peaceful nation. Major crimes occur at very low rates and it has a robbery ratio of 1.1 to every 100,000 people. The US has a ratio of 233 to every 100,000 people. One reason that may be attributed to the safety of the country is its culture. The Japanese are taught to never bring shame to their families, therefore abstain from disorderly conduct. The prosperous Japanese economy and tight gun control also can be factored in.
4. Ireland. Threats of terrorism and public riots are very slim in this Gaelic land. People are virtually free and the government functions with very, very little corruption. How often do we hear of Ireland on the news? Almost never. There is freedom of religion and press in Ireland and the likelihood of public political demonstrations is: 0. Reasons why? Irish police are strict.
3. Denmark. Country most likely to be what Karl Marx imagined: socialism working. The Danes believe crime stems from poverty; therefore they have created a welfare state. People live comfortably and the most they have to worry about is pick pocketing. Police response is immediate.
2. New Zealand. Bottom line, you can walk almost anywhere at night. Zero litter, graffiti, and vandalism are some of the first things tourists see when they come to New Zealand and the government does a good job of monitoring crime. Violence is seldom heard of, but as in all big cities around the world, something is bound to happen sooner or later.
1. Norway. According to the Global Peace Index, Norway is the most peaceful country in the world. This nation has an immeasurable illiteracy rate as everyone of or above school age can read and unemployment rate of 3.5%; both factors contribute to the country's high level of safety. Another indicator of safety? The increase of cruise ships with ports of call in Norway and increased general tourism to the nation. Everything functions like clockwork.Their laws more Draconian then ours ah?
-
Even if you look at other standards of measuring safety, Singapore still does not top this list.
These are based on reported homicide rates, from the 2002 report. The figures are X per million.
(1.) Slovenia 0.7
(2.) Austria 0.9
(3.) Sweden 1.8
(4.) Switzerland 2.3
(5.) Israel 2.3
(6.) Hong Kong 2.4
(7.) Norway 2.5
(8.) Ireland 2.8
(9.) Finland 3.7
(10.) Singapore 4.3 -
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
TS should really answer this question...
If Draconian law is really the basis for security... and given the fact that Singapore is a small nation that is vastly easier to police then other nations...
Why then it is NOT the safest nation in the world?
In fact, let's look at a list of the SAFER nations then Singapore:
Their laws more Draconian then ours ah?
I really really wish that i can view the source for stuff, and not just assume whatever is posted to be true.
-
What is more interesting is that if TS theory is right, Singapore is the BEST place to pass and implement Draconian law given the small size of the nation, making it easy to enforce.
So how come we're still not the safest.
To be frank, all this talk about our safety is arrogrant and somewhat overrated, yes we are safe compared to some other nations, but we are hardly the safest nation in the world and this is shameful given that we OUGHT to be given the ease of policing a tiny nation like Singapore.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
I really really wish that i can view the source for stuff, and not just assume whatever is posted to be true.
Google is your friend,I don't claim them to be totally precise, because "safety" is a very hard thing to measure. There are so many standards you can go by... however going by most of the accepted methods Singapore still does not top this list.
This means that a lot of our self-belief in our security is based on a lot of assumptions formed by us keep hearing the same old "good" stories about our soceity... but the truth is yes I was more wary when I was in other nations, but I didn't exactly live in fear of the mob when I was in Australia or the like, you just learn to be more careful.
-
Basically, everyone has their own idea of a "safest" country... however if you want to look at it in a certain way and say that it is BECAUSE of Draconian laws that we have safety... then you're probably talking rubbish.
Last I checked China's laws were even harsher then ours, but the inability to police and implement these laws means that they are far from being as safe as us... but of course the whole question is if draconian laws are the only and best solution.
TS obviously believes in the concept of legalism, which I do not believe is the best system to inspire moral behaviour and create security.
-
i googled cos you didn't list the source. mine is based on this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index
criteria 16-18, 20-24 is where singapore will lose out in this index. now i see why japan, who don't really have an army, ranked so high.
-
At least Australian democracy didn't let any terrorist leader escape.
I believe the abolishment of currency to be the key to financial "freedom" though.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
At least Australian democracy didn't let any terrorist leader escape.
I believe the abolishment of currency to be the key to financial "freedom" though.
haha, australia never let any terrorist escape.... haha....
violent stuffs happens there too. it is simply not that big a deal there compared to singapore.
-
criteria 16-18, 20-24 is where singapore will lose out in this index. now i see why japan, who don't really have an army, ranked so high.
FIY, the Japanese actually have quite a competent army.
-
I agree with the progressive narrative..that harsh laws are meant to be in place to maintain order, and to keep the peace, when the conditions necessitate it. But when a country is deemed to have developed, and has attain a certain level of literacy and education level, then wouldn't we, by perpetuating the existence of harsh laws, be preventing ourselves from elevating ourselves unto to a greater level of social progression?
Of course, laws work because they appeal to the fear mechanism in all of us, as Hobbes has postulated. That our natures are nasty, brutish and short. But that is a nature that is without intellect and without any sense of morality. A populace who are engulfed in the fear mechanism follow the laws for what they are. A populace who are weaned off the fear mechanism follows the laws, as to accord the spirit of the laws to be in accordance to the spirit of their intellect.
And for all of your people who believe that progress is defined solely by economic growth, yes, I believe greater liberalization (on our own terms) is the source of creativity and further progress. I'm certain the government recognizes that, and that is why they are taking baby steps in allowing certain degrees of freedom in certain areas.
-
I'm certain the government recognizes that, and that is why they are taking baby steps in allowing certain degrees of freedom in certain areas.
I think that is due to some pressure from the ground, not because they "realise" anything.
We are talking about Lee Kuan Yew and PAP.
I don't see any progressive leaders in PAP.
Do you?
-
Haha, Ah Pak, I know you have an axe to grind with the government, but remember that have been have been in power for the last forty off years, and I'm sure some elements within it find present day Singapore a little disorientating.. Progressives? honestly, i don't know. But I'm getting a greater sense that people want to be heard, and many, like in this present thread are questioning elements of our society that we will never see the previous generation dare or have the ability to question. I believe with time, as you say from the ground, the leaders will respond.
-
I believe with time, as you say from the ground, the leaders will respond.
Lee Kuan Yew still alive, so that is going to be hard.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
FIY, the Japanese actually have quite a competent army.
google is your friend.
-
Originally posted by reyes:
i am not sure whether iron fist treatment in tibet is consider harmonous. anyway, Hu does not concern about draconia laws. such petty issues are normally handle by province state govt.
deportation of because prostitution is consider draconia? at least we dont have to worry about it in singapore than in china.
name the iron fist treatment, i don't know that, seems that you adopt the western view about Tibet, but how do you know tibet, do you guys really cares about what happens in Tibet, how much you understand buddhism, or tibetan buddhism in particular. -
Interesting info on Tibet:
In the current debate on Tibet the two opposing sides see almost everything in black and white—differing only as to which is which. But there is one issue that both Chinese authorities and Tibetan nationalists consistently strive to blur or, better still, avoid altogether.
At the height of the Cultural Revolution hundreds of thousands of Tibetans turned upon the temples they had treasured for centuries and tore them to pieces, rejected their religion and became zealous followers of the Great Han occupier, Mao Zedong...
-
Western style democracy will do u no good.
Ah, the old Western way of doing things. Western style of democracy IS democracy. Singapore style of 'democracy' isn't. It falls under this 'Asian' way of doing things, this mythical Asian culture that is perpetuated as a convenient excuse to do things differently, or in this case to abandon fundamental principles of human rights and democracy and still have the audacity to claim democracy.Hard to argue against Asian culture, since there is no such thing, and besides, non-'Asians' don't have a right to comment on this non-existent Asian culture, since well, they're not Asians.
But I digress. Draconian laws certainly have their benefits. The question is, at what price?
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Interesting info on Tibet:
In the current debate on Tibet the two opposing sides see almost everything in black and white—differing only as to which is which. But there is one issue that both Chinese authorities and Tibetan nationalists consistently strive to blur or, better still, avoid altogether.
At the height of the Cultural Revolution hundreds of thousands of Tibetans turned upon the temples they had treasured for centuries and tore them to pieces, rejected their religion and became zealous followers of the Great Han occupier, Mao Zedong...
when i got time, i will read it -
Western style of democracy IS democracy.
That would be quite naive.
INTERVIEW WITH NOAM CHOMSKY: 'The United States Has Essentially a One-Party System'