Your vote is secret.
I wanted to blog about the many election tactics the PAP has dealt out that just doesn't sit well with the image of a first-class government.
But I realized that there really isn't any point. It got me started on thinking whether these tactics were justified. The PAP had to do whatever it had to do to stay in power, for the good of the country. The ends justify the means. In a broader perspective, perhaps it does. We need to prevent the oppostion from stepping in and destroying the PAP's good works. For the good of the country, we need to do whatever it takes to prevent that.
This is assuming that the members of the opposition are all utterly incapable and are all bent on their own selfish agendas. I'll leave it to you to decide whether this assumption is true.
Walking away from the 2006 general elections, I was most impressed with the Workers' Party manifesto (even in comparison with PAP's). I was most appalled when the Prime Minister said that having 10, 20, 30 opposition members in parliament meant that he had to devote his time and energy to "fix" them (which he got his secretary to apologize on his behalf for the use of this word if it offended). He then said that he meant he needed to argue policies back and forth with them.. and questioned Singaporeans if that was what we wanted.
Yes. That IS what we want.
I was most disgusted with the buying of votes through offering lift-upgrading worth up to 100 million dollars of taxpayers money. However, I am sure that the government realizes that the growing young population is educated and will probably not be bought over by lift-upgrading. Hopefully.
I am quite surprised at the number of Singaporeans that actually cared about politics. So many came to rallies, discussed on blogs, turned up to support their parties. And at least a decent number of my young friends were stirred by the elections. More than I expected but of course very much less than what it should be. Quite a number of my friends asked me about how my vote went. I didn't vote. I am in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, we had a walkover. It really shouldn't only matter to you when you need to cast a vote. This is our country. It is supposed to be a democratic one. The service required to build this country comes not solely from the men in white. It also does not come from the critic that stands aloof from the contest. It comes from the men who joins the battle and bear their part.
But I realized that there really isn't any point. It got me started on thinking whether these tactics were justified. The PAP had to do whatever it had to do to stay in power, for the good of the country. The ends justify the means. In a broader perspective, perhaps it does. We need to prevent the oppostion from stepping in and destroying the PAP's good works. For the good of the country, we need to do whatever it takes to prevent that.
This is assuming that the members of the opposition are all utterly incapable and are all bent on their own selfish agendas. I'll leave it to you to decide whether this assumption is true.
Walking away from the 2006 general elections, I was most impressed with the Workers' Party manifesto (even in comparison with PAP's). I was most appalled when the Prime Minister said that having 10, 20, 30 opposition members in parliament meant that he had to devote his time and energy to "fix" them (which he got his secretary to apologize on his behalf for the use of this word if it offended). He then said that he meant he needed to argue policies back and forth with them.. and questioned Singaporeans if that was what we wanted.
Yes. That IS what we want.
I was most disgusted with the buying of votes through offering lift-upgrading worth up to 100 million dollars of taxpayers money. However, I am sure that the government realizes that the growing young population is educated and will probably not be bought over by lift-upgrading. Hopefully.
I am quite surprised at the number of Singaporeans that actually cared about politics. So many came to rallies, discussed on blogs, turned up to support their parties. And at least a decent number of my young friends were stirred by the elections. More than I expected but of course very much less than what it should be. Quite a number of my friends asked me about how my vote went. I didn't vote. I am in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, we had a walkover. It really shouldn't only matter to you when you need to cast a vote. This is our country. It is supposed to be a democratic one. The service required to build this country comes not solely from the men in white. It also does not come from the critic that stands aloof from the contest. It comes from the men who joins the battle and bear their part.
posted by undergradbyday @ 3:18 PM
5 Comments:
At 11:31 PM,
Anonymous said…
gosh.. don't tell me you're letting someone who can think of opposing laws about nudity in her "supposed-to-convince-you" speech, really convince you she can help Singapore?...or letting someone who is so fearful (that she gets overly paranoid about voting and people following her) convince you that you are fearful too? C'mon...
At 3:24 AM,
undergradbyday said…
while, i'm not an open supporter of the Workers' Party.. I think you've got it all wrong.
first, she's opposing laws about being convicted of indecency if seen nude without the intention of being indecent.
and i think theres nothing wrong in giving a speech to convince people that you can help Singapore if given the chance. im not really sure how else you can do so.
also, she was fearful but has overcome that fear. she didn't convince me that i am fearful. i already had that fear, rightly or wrongly. her story inspires me to not be afraid.
be objective, friend. thats what the country needs.
At 11:35 PM,
KiWeTO said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 11:43 PM,
KiWeTO said…
Fir,you also committed the classic juxtaposition error - u equated PAP with government too.
You said - "many election tactics the PAP has dealt out that just doesn't sit well with the image of a first-class government"
What you meant to say was "many election tactics the PAP has dealt out that just doesn't sit well with the image of a first-class PARTY running the government"
think about it. The party forms the government, but is NOT the government. The PAP strives to erase that semantic difference so that the people will forever associate PAP as government rather than a political party with an ideology (or the lack of one).
As for "justanote"'s comment, the fear is real. If you don't believe it, wait until you're standing in the voting booth and trying to weigh everything up to make a decision.
At 2:34 AM,
undergradbyday said…
naturally, i had an argument ready to defend what i said. but a moment's pause and I realized u're right about the semantics.
however, can't i say that the PAP can't ever form an executive that meets what we would feel would be a first-class executive or government, because of how it got there? or can a second-class party form a first-class government?
perhaps this is the case.
if we want it all first class we'll have to wait until the hatchet is buried.
Post a Comment
<< Home