DEFINITION OF TRUE DEMOCRACY
-
Originally posted by runningismylife:
If you have read my simple post, and still cannot figure out the depth of the issue raised - the mind is dulled to the extent that it cannot understand what is being read, and constantly need a guiding hand to show you the way to interprete what is being printed. It clearly shows the success of the Governemt in dulling the minds of most Singapore Citizens, and create the constant dependence of Singaporeans for a steady guiding hand from the Government, who have purposefully encouraged dependency so as to make themselves permanently indispensable.
haha atobe you don't make sense at all.
if you said that our current "predicament" dulls the mind, than i wonder HOW ON EARTH CAN WE EVEN HAVE THIS DEBATE RIGHT NOW.
if we go by your argument, all our points are void. caus our mind have been "dull-ed", and we don't make sense.
How did you come to believe that Chee Soon Juan can only speak balderdash, and can only be disruptive to any discussion ? Were you persuaded to believe that he is such or did you form an opinion after PARTICIPATING in debate with him and simply cannot accept the situation as seen from his point of views ?continuing post by runningismylife:
The fact that we are able to discuss this topic, on broadband or modem connection, with either a LCD or cathode tube monitor, in ease or discomfort - are seen from only a materialistic point only.
the fact that we are able to discuss this topic, on a broadband connection, with a LCD monitor, in ease and comfort, SHOWS that we are very much better off as compared to many other nations.
How many can actually afford an LCD, and remain with a cathode ray tube monitor ? How many can afford broadband and are still stuck with the modem ? How many can still afford to stay in a 5 Room HDB, and prefer to DOWNGRADE in order to survive into their old age, or to make ends meet during this recession period ?
Are we better off today - even with our strong Singapore Dollar, that is supposed to give us a COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE over our agricultural based neighbors ? Or are we getting less and paying a higher price despite the fact that our Singapore Dollar is stronger, and which should give us a BIGGER COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE vis-a-vis our neighbors ?
Are the numbers of Singaporeans falling into the LOWER INCOME BRACKET growing in size, while the MIDDLE INCOME GROUP is shrinking with each retrenchment exercise and as long as the FOUR PERCENT unemployment persist through 2005 ?
Can you seriously compare the meer possession of material goods with the actual QUALITY of LIFE ?
Such simplistic and materialistic views reflect a generation that is accustomed to economic growth, and have yet to face the stark reality and challenges of retrenchment - a result of the MIND being DULLED with all the goodies, and unable to discern the difficulties that the Government is concealing while they are facing this mind boggling challenge in resolving the crisis in Singapore that has persisted since 1987 recession.Originally posted by runningismylife:
Sorry to say this, but where did you get your brief from, concerning the reasons behind the sacking of Singapore by Socialist International ?
even in europe, most of the scandinavian countries practises Socialism Democracy. and for your info Atobe, the reason why we were nearly kicked out of the clique of social democracy league, is because of our reluctance to give a PENSION SCHEME, a NATION-WIDE FREE HEALTH SCHEME.
schemes which are bringing many european countries to their knees. EG. BRITAIN.
thus, the foresight shown back in the 1970s show that our leaders were right. a pension scheme coupled with a nation-wide free health scheme would have killed Singapore post 1998 and sars.
This piece of information is certainly "balderdash" - to accurately apply your term.
Do you seriously expect us to believe that a serious organisation such as the Socialist International will want to expell Singapore simply due to the reluctance of the Singapore Government to bring the Pension Scheme and implement a Nation-wide Free Health Scheme similar to Europe ?
This is a very new angle in viewing Singapore's expulsion from the Socialist International membership.
See the referenced site:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_International
Will such an 'august' organisation as the Socialist International - with so many leading countries that believe in SOCIALISM and DEMOCRACY - be so UNDEMOCRATIC and INTOLERANT towards Singapore, as to seek her expulsion from this organisation over the mundane issues of health and pension scheme ?
This is a fantastic point of view, and certainly takes the cake in thought process from a 'dulled' mind. -
"runningismylife " is not the only one in this forum that has displayed traits that have been practised by the Ruling Party in responding to Opposition views.Originally posted by sgdiehard:
wah lao!! you jumped out of nowhere and started saying those who disagree with you "perform parrot like ad verbertim quote ................., sparkling display of mindless full regurgitation of whole statement", "think in a Zombie-like manner...." and "can only imitate the life form similar to the lower animals..... ".
Glad politicians like this will not get elected in singapore. Singaporeans know a tyrant when they see one, or is it democracy at work here?
[/quote]
If you care to be a little bit more accurate, you will note that it was not quite "jumping out of nowhere" but I have been posting my views and started a few new thread over the last week or so.
My statements were made in response to those who believe that Opposition Members would bark like dogs, and can be so intolerant towards the likes of Chee Soon Juan - for whatever the worth of the Man - to the extent of grinding someone that is prepared to sacrifice more then you and I - and the personna in "runningismylife " .
It was made intentionally to return his compliments for the manner and style that "runningismylife " prefer to post his views, and be intolerant towards any views that favor the Opposition.
From the other thread, in which "runningismylife " actually jumped out of nowhere and made a typical run-of-the-mill ad verbatim quote as a loyal boot licker of the Ruling Party:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=post&thread_id=92609&q_post_id=2132203
[quote]Originally posted by runningismylife:hey atobe. instead of just shooting your mouth off like a deranged dog. why not put ur money where your mouth is?
contribute ur money to help Chee pay off his debts larh..
so come the next GE, he can bark like a dog in front of the MM and SM again
These personnas seem to be unabashed in adopting the condescending and superiority complex styles of the Ruling Party, when they have no basis to do so in such an overbearing manner towards other fellow participants in this forum. -
Sorry popping out but i think that democracy is an ideal world, there is no assect definition... ppl improve on ideas & apply it from time to time... anyway wat is the most ideal world like heaven... paradise, everything is free, free of economic stress, free of worries & sufferings... only when the greed for monetary gains is ZeRO then can it be free, because everyone does whatever is supposed to do willingly & freely, gains anything & everything they want freely too, u can gain more because it is unlimited.Originally posted by robertteh:True democracy should incorporate the following elemental ingredients:-
(1) One Man One Vote,
(2) Protection of citizens against prosecution for participating in governance.
(3) Basic rights of citizens are spelt out and enshrined in constitution.
(4) Due process is observed by administrative/executive to practise rule of law to uphold laws and order, fairness and equity and non-interferences with election or or constitutional rights of citizens centred on the constitution - the highest document of the land or nationhood.
(5) Interpretations on conflicts of interests or potential interests be administered by an independent small claim or citizens' right sub-court nominated by non-political or non-partition civil activists. UN agencies can be invited to advise or assist in such inexpensive overseer body for the goodness of governance. For example, giving of goodies that may unfairly influence the voting process or fairness be subject to such small claim prior determination.
(6) Self-voting of ministers' pay or alignment to private sector pay (abstention from voting and debate should be observed) is full of pitfalls or potential conflicts and should be re-examined. Compilation of private sector pays should be published for independent citizens' rights sub-court review.
(7) Law suits on political opponents be referred to citizens' right sub-court for prior certification that there is no infringement of constitution laws or citizens' basic rights to free election or participation in governance.
There may be many more items which can be usefully added to refine our current political system to make it more accountable and open. Only in this manner can we really say that we have achieved progress and success. Only in this way can we expect the youths to truly come forward to serve the nation. My humble personal views and opinions on this subject.
It's the same for democracy -
Many of your questions are factual, and the answers publicly available, acknowledged and written/analysed in various academic texts, journal articles and legal commentaries. I will answer them simply leaving you to read up if you are genuinely interested.
robertteh writes,Did Indonesia develop its present democracy from its heritage?
Indonesia's first experience with democracy was in 1945 when it gained its independence and promulgated its first constitution. Strong president, weak legislature. That's its 'heritage'.
robertteh writesDid Japan, Taiwan or India take advantage of its heritage in coming to their present electoral democracy ?
Japan- American Occupation (1945-1952) reformed its entire political system, but also left a place for the Japanese monarchy.
Taiwan- based on 1946 constitution which was drawn up for entire China (incuding mainland).
India-British granted independence in 1947, constitution written three years later, runs a bicameral parliamentary system and draws extensively from British and American liberal democracies.
robertteh writesI understand what you are trying to say that there are many problems affecting countries trying to practise American democracy, What I had pointed out is clear - that the problems you mentioned with Taiwan, or Philippines are not necessarily attributable to system failure. Many intervening factors may be involved to explain why other democratizations do not work as well. Time is one factor as I am sure you will agree.
Actually some democracies are unable to function properly simply because they were badly designed in the first place e.g strong executive, weak legislature, multitude of parties in parliament all protecting their own agendas without compromise, strong personality-based parties due to weak party system etc. Of course other factors may exist, but this does not diminish the importance of a well-designed constitution.
robertteh writesI have merely tried to tell you to look at endurance of democratic system of governance from a historical perspective to show that despite all the criticisms against American or UK model nonetheless, democracy has developed and been accepted by increasing number of countries
I have said repeatedly I agree with you that American presidential and British parliamentary democracies are universally acknowledged as liberal democracies (see my many previous posts which state those sentiments in exactly the same words!), but that while they function well in their respective countries, it is because they evolved over centuries according to the unique historical circumstances. It is 'accepted' in the sense that other countries realise that these are two democracies which have bits here and there worth emulating, but they are NOT accepted in the sense that the two models have been copied wholesale elsewhere.
robertteh writesCritics of American liberal democracy (as you would like to call it) did not fully grasp its goodness but only look at it as full of problems which in the final analysis may be just the same everywhere or worse elsewhere.
You have made your judgement about American democracy and its "goodness". For you, two hundred years is probably an adequate period of time. Has it served the American people well? I have pointed out the fracas in the last American election in 2000 in my previous posting (6 Sept 2004). Those are facts and events which have been (over)commented/analysed in the international media and televised- if facts cannot convince you, perhaps you are so steeped in American "goodness", probably nothing much else will. Let me also add that various Senate enquiries, the various scandals of ties between VP Dick Cheney and Halliburton, the expose of the neo-convservatives and their agenda have only served to highlight the fraility of current 'democratic' practices and dented the credibility of the current US administration. (to put it mildly!)
robertteh writesIf critics are so intent on criticising American or UK democracy, surely it is not too much to ask them to define which is the model best suited to a particular circumstance other than just heritage or something loose or changeable.
Of course it is good to have something to work with. I can do that but I also have to add that there is no "true model" per se that exists. All politcal scientists generally agree that democracy should consist of: law and order, a functioning bureaucracy, civil and political rights, universal suffrage, defined territorial borders which confers citizenship, clearly defined responsibilities and relationships of/between executive, legislature, judiciary and constraints in the use of violence against citizens. (Browse any texts/journals and you will find roughly the same guidelines.) Perhaps it was crucial that you should have read up (even if just from the internet) first, instead of writing in a offhand/loose fashion your 7-point criteria and then expecting some form of quaity debate.
Surely they can come up with some 7 points too for useful discussions.
robertteh writesThe substance behind their contention that there is no point to discuss or there is no such thing as democracy or true democracy is not presented so far despite my repeated request.
As you can see, many people have participated in this subject, and it still remains at the top of the forum even as I write. One works with what is available, without expecting too much. It's a public forum afterall.
robertteh writesIn my opinion, true democracy may be idealistic, and different country may need to approach it from their own perspective and circumstances
I have noted that you tend NOT to answer the specific questions I pose in previous postings, preferring to bring up new questions (and old ones I have already responded to) or prevaricate. I asked previously, what is 'true democracy'? 'True to you or the people who have to live under it?'.
It is meaningless to say that 'democracy has been accepted and developed' by many countries. That much is common sense. Even North Korea calls itself Democratic People's Republic of Korea. What is crucial is to grasp its intrinsic intricacies and to apply it to unique national situations. Harping on American 'goodness' and resorting to cliches (as you have done in your various posts on this subject) without a critical eye serves no other purpose than reveal your own (misplaced) inclinations and preconceived preferences. -
an afterthought for robertteh (I couldn't help it!)
By the way, you have to be familiar with terms used in the subject of Democracy. It would really help if you know at least what you are talking since the overall quality of this discussion would be raised. It takes a great amount of restraint and patience to continue here without resorting to snide remarks and petty taunts about your (evident lack of) familiarity/knowledge of the subject especially when you are the original contributor!
Do you know what an 'electoral democracy' is to begin with?
robertteh writesDid Japan, Taiwan or India take advantage of its heritage in coming to their present electoral democracy ?
Kapan, Taiwan and South Korea are NOT 'electoral democracies' but substantive ones. (For a definition of electoral democracy, I leave you to do a Google yourself) You won't find a book that describes those systems as such, just like there is no serious academic text which will describe Sweden as a communist state. I won't point out other obvious glaring errors. -
I have noticed the tendency to use British or American models (and occasionally Australian ones) as yardsticks. What is the reason for that? Is it because they are Anglophone nations?
Seriously, Continental Europe also needs a good look. While the British system is about one-party rule, it makes provision for minority governments formed with the help of allies. On the Continent, proportional representation is common and nobody has an absolute majority. The latter should become the norm as democracy, IMO should be about power-sharing and equality.
I pull no punches in my advocation of proportional representation as i feel it is a much better way to go about governing the country. Nobody has a monopoly on all the (limited) power available. Instead, ALL parties are in it together. -
to the pika whatever his name is:
if you consider people who got retrenched but are in debts due to their lack of ability managing their money before their retrenchment, like buying a new condo, a new car. than it's of no doubt why they are in debt. yet, to solve their debt, a simple solution would be to sell off their condo and the keyword is DOWNGRADE. yet downgrade seems like a stigma to many retrenched personnel, who retains their materalistic properties at the expense of their very social well-being.
if you consider people in singapore as below the poverty line.
i wonder what "slightly well off" people in indonesia, living on US$1 is.
are they subterrean poverty line than? -
iveco writes
I have noticed the tendency to use British or American models (and occasionally Australian ones) as yardsticks. What is the reason for that? Is it because they are Anglophone nations?
My preferences are due to familiarity, acceptance of those two countries as standards in texts and public discussions, the fact that they are two democracies other newly-independent/democratizing countries look to. Of course, the fact that robertteh keeps harping on the 'goodness' of American democracy also means I have to put my points to him on the same ground. If he chooses to talk about Swede democracy, naturally I will turn my attention to Sweden.
iveco writesproportional representation is common and nobody has an absolute majority. The latter should become the norm as democracy, IMO should be about power-sharing and equality.
You are quite right in pointing out the benefits of proportional representation (PR) system that is practised in countries such as Australia and Japan. But there are many flaws inherent in this too: a complex vote-counting method, the inclination among various parties to resort to inter-party bargaining, intra-party bargaining among politicians of the same party to be given first priority on party preferences, a multi-party system in a parliament which is slower to reach compromise and more likely to remain obstinate, increased likelihood of personality-based politics where voters vote for the individual, rather than the party agenda or platform etc. So many examples of these defects can be observed in combined PR/FPTP systems.
I pull no punches in my advocation of proportional representation as i feel it is a much better way to go about governing the country.
Reagrdless of whether first-past-the-post system (FPTP) is practised or the the PR system is practised, my opinion is that it has to suit the national circumstance. For me, it really isn't about 'equality' or 'power-sharing'. It's about voting in the party that individual voter wants. My opinion is that a simpler voting method is always preferable, especially in small countries with small populations- no need to jostle for party preferences or backroom bargaining. But of course, your preferences are as good as mine. -
by iveco
I have noticed the tendency to use British or American models (and occasionally Australian ones) as yardsticks. What is the reason for that? Is it because they are Anglophone nations?
this method will fail to work in Singapore. we have a small number of opposition MPs in our parliment, and without fail, each time there is a drastic new policy or draft, the opposition MPs will be up in anger over the supposed harm to our people. if we extend the power to more opposition MPs, there will be an ever significant amount of people debating and fighting the draft. and do we need this is little Singapore?
Seriously, Continental Europe also needs a good look. While the British system is about one-party rule, it makes provision for minority governments formed with the help of allies. On the Continent, proportional representation is common and nobody has an absolute majority. The latter should become the norm as democracy, IMO should be about power-sharing and equality.
I pull no punches in my advocation of proportional representation as i feel it is a much better way to go about governing the country. Nobody has a monopoly on all the (limited) power available. Instead, ALL parties are in it together.
do we need 3-4 months for both minority and majority parties to consolidate, buy votes just to sort out a particular draft? this is evident in the reichstag where all parties fought for their particular cause, and left the reichstag powerless to come to a decision on any issue.
i believe it is more crucial for the opposition to question their ability and tenacity to govern this country. it's time to put aside grudges against the PAP in order to work for the better good of Singapore. if the opposition parties maintain deep-rooted animosity against the PAP, no matter what they do, it will still be in the disfavor of Singapore.
probably the first step the opposition could take is to stop making useless enemies with the PAP. the PAP maintains a stranglehold on the media. the media. thus by fighting against a media which transmit information to 4.5million people, you are literally fighting barefist against a steel wall.
gain the people's trust the opposition MPs must. Chiam See Tong has done a good job in his Potong Pasir constituency. even having his meet-the-people sessions in void decks. This is a way to win the people's trust.
BUT by having people like Chee Soon Juan, who flees whenever he is in trouble, who runs whenever he gets into trouble. how do you expect singaporeans like me, to support him? he barks, accuses, but as long as the government continues to take care of me, would i bother about Chee Soon Juan.
i believe at the end of the day, a policitian must possesses Charisma and a high EQ. both sadly, chee soon juan is lacking greatly. -
the poverty line depends on Cost of Living; it is not a static entity. So Singapore's poverty line is much higher than Indonesia's, mainly because water and electricity bills are so high.Originally posted by runningismylife:to the pika whatever his name is:
if you consider people who got retrenched but are in debts due to their lack of ability managing their money before their retrenchment, like buying a new condo, a new car. than it's of no doubt why they are in debt. yet, to solve their debt, a simple solution would be to sell off their condo and the keyword is DOWNGRADE. yet downgrade seems like a stigma to many retrenched personnel, who retains their materalistic properties at the expense of their very social well-being.
if you consider people in singapore as below the poverty line.
i wonder what "slightly well off" people in indonesia, living on US$1 is.
are they subterrean poverty line than?
You tell pple to sell off condo, and where are they going to live? besides, nobody going to buy condo now, since economy is bad.
the pikamaster -
Have you been taking too much of the Straits Times' (biased, pro-govt) reporting on local affairs? Go read the article on CSJ more carefully. He didn't flee; he was merely going to a congress. For all his faults, he never flees.Originally posted by runningismylife:by iveco
this method will fail to work in Singapore. we have a small number of opposition MPs in our parliment, and without fail, each time there is a drastic new policy or draft, the opposition MPs will be up in anger over the supposed harm to our people. if we extend the power to more opposition MPs, there will be an ever significant amount of people debating and fighting the draft. and do we need this is little Singapore?
do we need 3-4 months for both minority and majority parties to consolidate, buy votes just to sort out a particular draft? this is evident in the reichstag where all parties fought for their particular cause, and left the reichstag powerless to come to a decision on any issue.
i believe it is more crucial for the opposition to question their ability and tenacity to govern this country. it's time to put aside grudges against the PAP in order to work for the better good of Singapore. if the opposition parties maintain deep-rooted animosity against the PAP, no matter what they do, it will still be in the disfavor of Singapore.
probably the first step the opposition could take is to stop making useless enemies with the PAP. the PAP maintains a stranglehold on the media. the media. thus by fighting against a media which transmit information to 4.5million people, you are literally fighting barefist against a steel wall.
gain the people's trust the opposition MPs must. Chiam See Tong has done a good job in his Potong Pasir constituency. even having his meet-the-people sessions in void decks. This is a way to win the people's trust.
BUT by having people like Chee Soon Juan, who flees whenever he is in trouble, who runs whenever he gets into trouble. how do you expect singaporeans like me, to support him? he barks, accuses, but as long as the government continues to take care of me, would i bother about Chee Soon Juan.
i believe at the end of the day, a policitian must possesses Charisma and a high EQ. both sadly, chee soon juan is lacking greatly.
Aren't you a little one-sided when you say that the opposition must "question their ability and tenacity to govern the country"? I believe a few of our ministers and MPs need to do the same thing too. For example, a Mr Ong...., who somehow came up with a stupid conservative idea that Giving Birth is national duty. Or our Ex-Education minister who did nothing that made the core essence of the education system easier for students to bear, or our current Education minister who hasn't really made any true changes to the Education system; he only made a couple of surface changes. Or our dear PM, who is still reluctant to ease rules on public political debate and crapped about "western-influenced liberals"?
the animosity by the opposition toward the ruling party is partly due to the animosity of the ruling party toward the opposition and its arrogance. Recently, LHL defended the prevention of opposition candidates of coming to the rally by saying that "opposition will not offer constructive views" and asserting that the rally was "a platform for the government tor ally the people's support"; in other words NDR was nothing more than a partisan publicity stunt. No wonder the opposition feel so much animosity. Not to mention the Defamation Acts that are harnessed...hmmm...regularly against oppo. Even the term "opposition" is derogatory in itself. UK cals its opposition "the shadow cabinet". And of course, you have the Political Donations Act, and frequent gerrymandering by the RUling party to take into consideration. Don't forget candidate registration during elections; there might be truth in the opposition's grouse about that.
Oh yeah, and the PAP should release its stranglehold on the media.
the pikamaster -
My opinion is that we hsould adopt UK's "shadow parliament" democracy.
-
looking at pro democracy advocates like Atobe, it provides the PAP with more justification not to allow more democracy to envelope Singapore.
it's because we are not ready for full-fledged democracy.
so pika, do you think we're ready for democracy?
PS: pika i'm quite sure you're pretty ignorant about the state of media. no media is free from censorship from their host government. just look at so called free media such as CNN and BBC. they are to an extent censored. so is there really free media in the world?
PPS: if the government is to free their stranglehold on the media, can you gurantee a continued state of tranquility and peace in this nation? i won't be surprised to see racially motivated articles in the Straits Times den, and i sure won't like to see malays and chinese fighting on the Padang again.
cause and effect mr Pika. -
PART ONE
pikamaster writes,Have you been taking too much of the Straits Times' (biased, pro-govt) reporting on local affairs? Go read the article on CSJ more carefully. He didn't flee; he was merely going to a congress. For all his faults, he never flees.
Pikamaster is not wrong in pointing out that the ST is pro-government. Indeed, the newspaper admits to that freely, seeing its role as more of a partner in 'nation-building' than as an agenda setter, and guardian of the social conscience as one conventionally assumes of the Western media.
Having said that, it is not uncommon to find partisan Western newspapers or media that sides with one party -pro-Bush Fox News is a well-known example. Other interesting facts: Italy's Prime Minister S. Berlusconi has US$10 billion worth of personal business stakes in most of the country's media outlets. The Thai Prime Minister, T. Shinawatra's Shin Corp has also bought over many of the country's media outlets, adding to his own telecoms empire.
It's far too easy to dismiss the ST as biased and prejudiced like many Western critics. The ST faces its own constraints and media regulations, and has found itself in hot water on many occasions e.g Business Times journalists Patrick Daniel and Kenneth James being penalised under the Official Secrets Act. These are well documented in Cherian George's Singapore: The Air Conditioned Nation. Is the ST that bad? I doubt it. Leaving its domestic news section aside, its coverage of international and regional news are on par with its counterparts in the West. This was acknowledged when it won the Newspaper of the Year 2002 from the Sydney-based Pacific Area Newspaper Publisher's Association (whose membership includes more than 300 newspapers in the Pacific region, including Australia and New Zealand). This also excludes the various technical awards the paper has also won.
ItÂ’s always a good thing to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism when reading news, including domestic news. But it is unnecessary and unpleasant to run down the local sections simply because you think everything you read is untrue, nonsensical and propaganda. Let others think and judge for themselves. The ordinary Singaporean has access to 5000 periodicals and newspapers, the internet, and major cable news networks. To dismiss anyone who reads the ST as ignorant, uninformed and provincial smacks of arrogance and a decidedly condescending attitude. It's simply a sweeping generalisation that mirrors what Western critics do when looking for a convenient and easy manner to talk down to Singapore and Singaporeans without bothering to hold up substantive evidence.
I wonder where pikamaster got the news that Chee Soon Juan missed his trial session because of a congress in Taiwan from, if not the ST. Was it the New York Times or the South China Morning Post? I had a look at the ST myself before writing this, and (gasp!) I found the ST reporting the very same story too, besides indicating the chronology of events. It's hardly a big secret that Chee did get his facts wrong again (although my opinion is it was intentional) when he demanded to know where a $17 million loan that was never made to Indonesia had gone. The fact is simply there was NO loan made, and the issue publicly debated and televised during the financial crisis.
pikamaster writesFor example, a Mr Ong...., who somehow came up with a stupid conservative idea that Giving Birth is national duty. Or our Ex-Education minister who did nothing that made the core essence of the education system easier for students to bear, or our current Education minister who hasn't really made any true changes to the Education system; he only made a couple of surface changes. Or our dear PM, who is still reluctant to ease rules on public political debate and crapped about "western-influenced liberals"?
These are merely your personal grouses. They are subjective and hardly heinous crimes. From a national perspective, not having babies is a serious issue, even though it is inherently one of individual choice. Why would it be portrayed as a 'national duty'? Perhaps because the majority of Singaporeans may not want to find themselves outnumbered by foreigners one day? Perhaps because the government does not want to depend on foreign labour and foreign talent for good (thus giving a lot of people here another reason to whine and complain). Perhaps because without enough citizens, the economy simply cannot function? Perhaps because if there are not enough Singaporeans, Singapore would simply cease to exist, and become extinct? Who knows? Do you care? Some people with some sense of rationality, and bonds to their birthplace obviously do.
As for education, I can almost hear your complaints about it being too tough, too uncreative, too much rote-learning, too long hours in school, too much homework and so on…..but that’s precisely why so many changes have been made. Your claims about the lack of ‘true changes’ and only ‘surface changes’ is not supported by evidence. Some have in fact complained about too frequent changes (like implementing SAT, and then making it optional, or the six year programme skipping O-levels). Are you going to complain that there are too many changes in your next post then? Or that tinkering with the education system to maintain economic competitiveness and meet industry needs is too hard on students? Or that the government is indecisive? The bottomline is change are necessary and unavoidable. While I sympathize with students who are actually the ones bearing the burden, it cannot be helped. Such is the harsh reality of life- not just in school, but in careers where constant learning will be required in the future.
Public political debates- What do you call forums like this? ItÂ’s public, and itÂ’s political. The decision to do away with permits for indoor talks which was announced recently? You are a senior member of this forum. I am sure you have observed the content, tone and maturity of many of the posts here. As I pointed out repeatedly in many previous posts, political socialization takes time and loosening of controls needs to be gradual before an educated, and well-informed populace can give constructive comments instead of turning against each other, and resorting to petty insults and taunts. -
PART TWO
pikamaster writesEven the term "opposition" is derogatory in itself. UK cals its opposition "the shadow cabinet". And of course, you have the Political Donations Act, and frequent gerrymandering by the RUling party to take into consideration.
I think you have half-baked ideas about political labels. There is nothing ‘derogatory’ about calling members from the non-governing party ‘the opposition’. It is used widely all over the world, including the UK, Australia and Canada. Mark Latham is frequently referred as the Opposition Leader (Labour Party) in Australia. It is a term used with respect and normality. I have absolutely no idea why you think it’s disparaging and belittling to the recipient. Perhaps you need to read more foreign newspapers or something. As for ‘shadow cabinet’, the UK does not adopt ‘shadow parliament’ democracy. The UK adopts Westminster parliamentary democracy. A shadow cabinet merely refers to the opposition party appointing one member to monitor his cabinet counterpart closely. Some countries practise this, others don’t.
All countries practice the ‘carrot and stick’ approach before elections. You may have a good opinion of Mr. Chee despite his many “faults” as you acknowledge yourself, but many Singaporeans have simply wised up. There is no need to elaborate at length the headlines he has made. -
LOL,hey who knows,maybe in Philipphines,u will be much more sucessful than in Singapore.There was this foreign friends once told me,if u can survive well under this tyrant government,u will have no problem surviving on the rest of the world!Maybe he is abit exaggerate,but from more n more Singaporeans migrating to other countries,it does make some sense!Originally posted by CenturionMBT:I don't care much about the gov policies. It is my own life that i am controlling. As long as i have a job, 3 meals and a roof over my head. I have nothing to complain about. I just live my life as it is. But give me a chaotic democracy like the philipines, and deprive me of all that, i will personally start a revolt
-
tyrannic gov? singapore? I have experienced worse. At least i can go to www.google.com here, not like some places where even the internet is censored.Originally posted by drawer:LOL,hey who knows,maybe in Philipphines,u will be much more sucessful than in Singapore.There was this foreign friends once told me,if u can survive well under this tyrant government,u will have no problem surviving on the rest of the world!Maybe he is abit exaggerate,but from more n more Singaporeans migrating to other countries,it does make some sense! -
Yup i agree,i also dont like politics.....but then last time Banks no need miniumum deposit $500,otherwise will get fined.Last time no have GST 5%,now have.Last time bus fare was relative cheap,now increase like hell.Last time taxi fare was reasonable,now from AMK to Geylang need at $7 to $8 plus.Last time got pirated CD,now all gone!......But most importantly,Last time my pay is $1000+,now still around that much![]Originally posted by CenturionMBT:Take it this way lah, if there is a party that has better than what the current party has to offer i will vote for that party. Otherwise at all times i will be doing compare and contrast. However, ultimately i wouldn't care less about the politics involved. Just as long as it doesn't change my life for the worst. Face it, politics is always dirty. No matter how you repackage it, in the end it still remains dirty.
And the damn government call us to upgrade,yes,i do upgrade,do they know i spent how much money on my driving license?And i want to upgrade to class 4 so i can be a delivery driver,but they make the test so "damn complicated",F**K MAN!I then go to take up insurance course,the F**king TesT was like "A-level",WTF!!!They call us to upgrade n yet make the upgrade things so difficult n put so many "barriers",how the hell are we going to survive?!!!Thats why i never like that stupid "Mr Goh",his jobs is just take his monthly salary n forget about the rest of us!Oh not to mention,he see the "old man" his leg will start "shaking"! -
Is it?Internet also censored ah?Where?Originally posted by CenturionMBT:tyrannic gov? singapore? I have experienced worse. At least i can go to www.google.com here, not like some places where even the internet is censored. -
hehe, better not mention it here otherwise i may anger the whole lot of them. But yeah it happened in sep 2002, where authorities shifted to block two of the most popular overseas portals, Google and AltaVista. And till this day, their isps are pretty tightly controlled. But of course they have hackers to go round the loopholes, but thats besides the point.
-
Oh i see.....but i still like to make my guess,THE COMMUNIST CHINA!!!(Joking)
-
You go and try first loh. If successful, then come back and tell us can?Originally posted by drawer:LOL,hey who knows,maybe in Philipphines,u will be much more sucessful than in Singapore.There was this foreign friends once told me,if u can survive well under this tyrant government,u will have no problem surviving on the rest of the world!Maybe he is abit exaggerate,but from more n more Singaporeans migrating to other countries,it does make some sense! 
-
Originally posted by drawer:Last time got pirated CD,now all gone
Still got, just need to open eye big big. -
Choice, choice, choice,
Democracy is about choice,
One man one vote,
Is the choice for Stability,
Through Gradual progression,
Of Fair representation,
Of views and opinions,
Of choice of better life,
Of fulfillment of aspirations,
Needs, and purposes of life,
Of social and community values,
Not found in any other systems,
That deem democracy as too ideal,
As too liberal and promiscuous,
Little do they know that it is the only model
That Offers ultimate protection,
Of citizens' basic rights,
Justice and equity through independent judiciary,
Accountable Executives and legislature,
To ensure laws and enforcements
Affecting people's lives and works
Are made accountable for protection,
Against Tyranny and egoism,
Or deprivations by fellow men,
Through the constitutions, laws and enforcements
Will offer safeguards by independent panels
They say democracy is too ideal,
And anyway, politics are ever dirty,
They sey they only want bread,
But man does not live by bread alone,
They say everything is Heritage,
And leadership and not democracy,
They say that there will be chaos,
If people can take to the street to exercise their freedom,
I told them without democracy,
There will be tyranny, oppressions and murders of the masses,
They say never mind, never mind,
Enough is enough
Go and study some more,
A book this and that,
Wisdom is more important,
And be happy and say no more,
Too early to say what will work,
This is democracy, but democracy should be treasured
And fought for and not denied,
Only then, will democracy work for the good of men. -
Originally posted by runningismylife:
How opinionated can you be when you can hardly learn to differentiate issues posted ?
looking at pro democracy advocates like Atobe, it provides the PAP with more justification not to allow more democracy to envelope Singapore.
it's because we are not ready for full-fledged democracy.
so pika, do you think we're ready for democracy?
PS: pika i'm quite sure you're pretty ignorant about the state of media. no media is free from censorship from their host government. just look at so called free media such as CNN and BBC. they are to an extent censored. so is there really free media in the world?
PPS: if the government is to free their stranglehold on the media, can you gurantee a continued state of tranquility and peace in this nation? i won't be surprised to see racially motivated articles in the Straits Times den, and i sure won't like to see malays and chinese fighting on the Padang again.
cause and effect mr Pika.
Does the Ruling Party need any further help from fellas like you - to run things around, when you do not even know what the purpose of all your running about ?
What a remarkable statement coming from you, that:-
Singapore is NOT ready for full fledged Democracy, just because of pro-democracy advocates like 'atobe' ?
Where are you running to with this line of thought ?
The problem of Democracy is that it needs a CIVIL SOCIETY - in which individuals learn to live and accomodate other's points of views.
We do not see much here, when we get the likes of you calling Opposition supporters as "deranged dogs" and holding the narrowest of views that seemed to be nothing but plagiarized ad verbatim copies from the Ruling Elite.
Quoting from the Ruling Elite does not make you one, or even anywhere near the Elite.
Why do you assume the worse for Singapore - if ever the Ruling Party should loosen their grip on the media ?
If after 39 years of independence, and the iron grip rule over all POLITICAL LIFE in Singapore, and the constant moulding, reshaping and drumming of the correct views - and Singaporeans can still slide back to the old days of racial intolerance - then it speaks volume on the ineffectiveness of the Iron Fisted Grip method of ruling Singapore.
You may wish to further educate yourself in the POLITICAL PROCESS that can be beneficial to Singapore, by reviewing the following article:
Contest for space: Civil and political society in east and southeast Asia
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw99/90720jgz.htm