Would Singapore be better if Barisan Sosialis had been the ruling party for the past 43 years? Could it have brought Singapore to the rank of developed nation? Could its leaders have transformed Singapore to what it is today?
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
paul
while your guess may be right
1 thing which also may be true is
you can say whatever u wan
‘cos we will nebber know,
would we ? as you said, ‘perhaps’. I agree lah. everything perhaps also.
Why doesn’t this guy hypothesize what Singapore would be like if PAP didn’t kick out the leftists in the first place and work with them instead?
Maybe we would have developed into a more inclusive and open society.
I wonder what is chan’s point in his message to the nation ?
To Paul,
Nobody will really know whether if Barisan Socialis had been in power, how would Singapore has progressed. It is all a moot point.
What I do know is that one must give credit to LKY and his PAP comrades for leading the country from third world to a thriving economy today. While I do give them credit for building a good infrastructure for businesses to thrive, I also hold them responsible for turning Singapore into a soulless materialistic society, a mindless pursuit for money with little compassion for the less fortunate.
And having multi-party democracy does not equate having fist-fights in parliament. There are many countries in the world with a successful multi-party democracy and a thriving economy. Luxembourg is a very good example.
Multi-party democracy are not synonymous with fist-fights in parliament, and multi-party democracy and economic progress are not mutually exclusive.
May be if we had a bigger presence of opposition in parliament to temper the PAP’s growth at all cost philosophy, Singapore may be better off today with balanced progress made in all aspect of our society instead of just economic.
The Barisan Socialis would have failed miserably. The PAP did a good job after independence, tough times do throw up great leaders. My main worry is that the ruling party is still toasting their past success and simply using cut and paste policies which may not be applicabe now. We live in different times which call for different approach to governing. Time to climb down from their ivory towers.
I hold the PAP responsible for
(1) not being able to communicate with my grandparents
(2) this materialistic society we live in
(3) the kind of education that I received
(4) the lack of representation for the 30-40% who did not vote for them
Paul,
Do u know how happy our ppl r when compare to other asian countries?
Agree with Yamasan that fist fights are fist fights and USA politicians do not fist fight. Naive minds can be taken in by sweeping statements.
Agree to disagree with Dan on his Guessing. But I respect his Believe and Hunch and Suspicion. Who believed man can land on the moon? Believe is what it is. Its not scientific. Its a preferred way of thinking in a probably biased way. But anyone is free to believe and I respect this.
Agree with Dan that History is the past. Lets look forward and expect more good years. Past does not mean Future. But anyone can still continue to Believe….in whatever they wanna.
I oso believe that I must definitely could have been a minister today if on the 4th of Nov 1960, I won 4D to allow me to study in Cambridge. I can only believe and believe and continue to believe if I choose to believe or I can oso choose not to believe as its like alice in wonderland. We can let our imagination run wild and have a good time.
I oso believe that if I had taken more milk in 1954, I could have grown taller like exactly 1.954m tall.
1 thing for sure, singapore a tiny land to develop, with scarce resources has done reasonable well. But then no one will ever know how it would have turned out if another party took over or bi-party system existed.
The FACT remains, Singaporeans generally have ZERO experience what it is like to be under another system or party. This fact is irrefutable.
Feel free to believe in whatever you wanna.
Dear Paul Chan,
You are just speculating by implying that no other political party can do a better job than PAP. Unless an alternative political party has actually been put in power, you and I will never know the answer. While you had painted a illustrious picture of PAP’s success, do you know that Barisan Sosialis was regarded as hero of the people during its time?
Isn’t uncanny that many of us have the similar description of PAP’s success so ingrained in us that it might actually be a result of propaganda and hard-selling of PAP’s success than rather voluntary acknowledgement of PAP’s success?
Irrelevant article.
Let’s be honest, Singapore hasn’t been doing well since the 1997 financial crisis. The PAP way is clearly not working.
Paul…let me invent a time machine….KNS with your “if”, “could”…..maybe mee siam “could have HUM”
I agree with No. 4 Yamasam.
Singapore is technically a developed nation today as well as a global economic & financial force to reckon with, but at what price?
A developed nation, in my view, would have a soul that’s alluring even if it may not have any external beauty to flaunt, so much so that people feel belonged, rather than trapped. It’s a place that you call “Home”, even when it’s no longer tops in the charts. It will be one that her citizens can be proud of, and one which outsiders long to be part of, even if there’s no pot of gold waiting for them, just a decent nation that sees people as people, not resources to be exploited.
Singapore was grounded in various core values mostly adapted from Confucian in her formative years in the 70s and 80s, and for that, I must give credit to the old guards, especially Mr Ong Teng Cheong, Mr S Rajaratnam and Dr Goh Keng Swee. That gave us a generation of people who are down-to-earth, prudent and diligent. When the change of guards took place in the 90s, unfortunately, that also became a turning point for Singapore.
Instead of building upon the good foundation, and continuing to develop the soul and identity of Singapore, our leaders went after gold & everything that smells like money. Every aspect of life was reduced to metrics and a single-minded pursuit of raising the economics bar. Those that cannot be measured, such as emotional health and social well-being, are conveniently “outsourced” to NGOs & VWOs.
As we hit the charts worldwide, we are also turning into a sorry nation. Many students and teachers alike are turning to emotional wrecks. There are untold cases of children in lower primary schools being referred to counsellors and outside sources of help; students abusing one another & posting the experience on Youtube; teachers abusing students; teenage suicides, etc. Despite a willingness to take a lower salary and go for skills-upgrading, middle agers are facing a tough time competing against the influx of foreign workers. Families are forced to camp out at East Coast beach on a long-term basis despite the availability of “affordable” housing offered by HDB. More and more are making plans to migrate, not because the grass is greener over there, but because it’s getting more unbearable over here.
The mother of it all has to be the systemic one-way redistribution of wealth from the people to the nation, so that she can further her causes, while the people are generally left hapless and feeling trapped.
I dare say that If the old guards & men & women of integrity are still alive, Singapore would be a much better place today and tomorrow.
The same can be said to when protest in Singapore were ban because “it will cause the country to go into chaos”. Fear mongering tales perpatuated by MSM.
Apparently this myth has been debunked.
Just look at recently minibonds at HLP, I think it was a good example of how a civilised protest rally can urge the Govt to do respond to an issue without throw chairs and fist fights.
So now you know why govt use to say “protest bad, cause chaos”, in actual fact, they fear citizens realised how “swiftly” they respond to any crisis.
We can show the world that protest rallies can be a communication tool rather than a confrontational weapon.
Let’s be honest, Singapore hasn’t been doing well since the 1997 financial crisis. The PAP way is clearly not working. – hansolo (#10)
The past success of the PAP government is the result of mere increases in economic inputs that led to greater economic growth. Unfortunately, this is only a one-off success in transforming the structure of the economy of Singapore.
Unfortunately, increases in economic input, without an increase in the efficiency with which those inputs are used–investing in more machinery and infrastructure–must run into diminishing returns; input-driven growth is inevitably limited. Sustained growth in a nation’s per capita income can only occur if there is a rise in output per unit of input.
This is known as total factor productivity and Singapore has not experienced any growth in total factor productivity. As early as 1982, a Harvard graduate student, Yuan Tsao, already found little evidence of efficiency growth in her dissertation on Singapore
Hi logicalman,
One of the best written pieces in a long long time and I am still nodding my head as I write. Thanks.
every so often, the local MSM would publish this kind of letter that makes me puke.
Why must Paul be so presumptuous?
We actually never know, Maybe the Barisan could make us a better and more
equittable society . We may have come a long way under the PAP, but
to the down and out, have-nots poor, are they really better off and happy than
they were before?
The opposition were never given a fair run in this place so its a moot point
to argue that they might have been
From reading history or George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’… Once one stays in place for too long, and become privileged, one slowly become the ones whom one replaced.
Paul,
The only way to know is to wait till LKY is out of the scene. If PAP can still sustain its performance well and above what it had delivered, then may be there is a good chance no other party could have done it (i.e. their policies and approaches are really solid and sound). If PAP fails (especially in bringing the people together), when LKY (and all the old guard) is not around, then its success was the result of being at the right place at the right time. I have great respect for LKY and the old guards, especially for their past successes and devotion to the people and country. Somehow the same respect for the current lot of leaders seem very, very hard to come by. Wonder if it is because they are there for some good altruistic reasons (like their retired counterparts) or for some career/personal development opportunities.. this is really something I very much want to know.
Dear Pol Cham (moral blankrupt):
Right wing use left wing to fly. After fly to the sky, right wing made the left wing become chicken wing. Now Singapore has only one wing that deny a shelter for it’s people to take cover. Maybe we should make the right wing become KFC and finish it off. Then we find another 2 wings!
If Barisan Sosialis is communist, given the history setting. Yes, they can’t do better than PAP.
Problem is, other than the word SOSIALIS there isn’t much indication that they are communist leh? Some more, I believe their party have other races also right? Maybe they should not social so much and be mistaken for communist. And lucky communist is no longer a threat at this time, if not alway social also will kanna.
Of course, the only present evil we get from the Communist are occasional poison milk, making gelyang jammed up, flooding our employment market with cheap non-english speaking labour. 先生。你要吃什么吗?
maybe should ask if pap will still be able to be good for the next 40 years?
So much for Singapore’s first class status, again i would like Paul Chan to go and ask my ah gong, ah ma, mother, father, uncle, auntie whether we are better off?
I have a bad premonition that singapore will be going downhill if our hypocrite leaders continue to suck our blood. Can we even last 5 years?
Paul is wrong when he said pap provided us good housing, good health care. Do you know our HDB flat cost $460k for a 4 rm flat, I would prefer may be Barisan to rule, and spore not so advanced, prices of HDB stable which is affordable to all, and really is subsidised flat and not playing with land cost. Good health care my foot. Our so called medisaved is a useless scheme. I prefer Barisan may be they won’t increase utility to 22% then decrease to 25%, and say the govt trying to help the people to tackle the economy downturn by decreasing utility to 25%. It is actually a decrease of mere 3% only. They already suck our money 22% more from Oct to Dec 08. Talking about our parliament, it is damn boring without good debaters, all talk cautiously, scare, scare, if there are fist fights, that would be more interesting, to attract people to involve in politics. Our society is real dull, ” quai quai ” type, obedient to govt.
Maybe Paul Chan will want to consider writing for Burma Junta too. He may just be rewarded with real gold to live in this “golden period”. Why ? Going by his hyperbole, the Junta is also responsible for keeping Burma alive and prosperous even though the layman is suffering, corruption is pervasive and human lives are destroyed, and it will be disaster if the opp party voted by the people take over because those opp party don’t have the “talent and experience” to manage the Burma as majority of these opp party members are now rotting and retiring in Jail ! Junta make Burma what is today and keeping it alive whereas opp party did not, so shouldn’t the Junta be revered for that too ?
So Paul please, you can fool some but not All.
The nonsense of Paul is such that as long as the PAP give the basic necessities that satisfy him, he is more than willing to overlook everything else that PAP has done badly and unjustly. No wonder Singapore lands in a such sad state.
Paul probably has not read enough about Lim Chin Siong nor Lee Siew Choh, nor LKY’s flirtation with elements of the CPM to gain public support, and his wielding the use of ISA on people who simply had a different ideology to him. Much of the politics then were the result of the Cold War and racially-based politics i.e. divisive, ideological politics.
The 50-60s were such a turbulent time for Singapore, as we moved away from British rule, and Communism on the rise. It required a different type of leadership, as opposed to now.
Clearly, Paul’s understanding of Singapore’s history started from LKY’s memoirs and what was taught at O-level Singapore History.
Funny leh…inCREDIBLE State’s Time forum does not accept comments for this letter from Paul…
Singapore under PAP did well as a COMPANY with record profits and reserves.
However, as a country, Singapore failed miserably.
paul,
how much total losses thus far?
why go for high risk?
can i retire?
exact cost of building one unit is how much?
why 22% electric company hike when oil so cheap ?
iba iba untooneh !
don’t run away from these questions.
They weren’t communist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Chin_Siong
No evidence has been found that LCS or his party was communist. Only that lky kept using the ‘communist’ reason to detain him and kick him out of power… noble indeed.
Its high time for Singaporeans to stop looking at PAP as a monolithic organisation. PAP of 1959 is different from PAP of 1989. PAP of 1989 is different from PAP of 2009.
We’ve to look at each generation of PAP critically for their respective achievements and failures. We’ve to judge each PM and Cabinet for their individual merits.
It’s long meaningless to keep saying we’ve come a long way since 1965. The future of our children demands us to see how far, of backwards, have we moved since 2005.
maybe one day when lky die then singapore will start to be different.
hope so.
i cannot hope that he will die faster so tha i can see the change.
most important is to stay healthy to see the day come.
i think i still have a mathamtic chance to see him die and singapore change.
I am willing to give Paul the benefit of stating the fact that we do have some developments (at least economically). However, this saying is almost always true : what got you ‘here’, will not get you ‘there’. I am not saying that the past isn’t important, but with this saying, think hard how much weightwage you should give to the past.
Hi Gemami,
Thanks for your compliments. Just speaking from the heart, with ears attuned to the ground.
No. 28 JohnnyKid,
I won’t even say Singapore did well as a company. It only seemed to do well. Till now, whatever announcements from Temasek or GIC with regards to their growth over the years cannot be & has never been independently verified, not even by our supposedly independent elected president. With the recent town council fiasco, the string of astronomical losses in investments by Temasek and GIC, I fear that many skeletons may already have been dissolved in acid over the years from mid-late 80s when Singapore started to set her sights on the global stage, and many more skeletons will remain shielded from the eyes of the public, unless and until something spills out accidentally.
Singapore has done well in areas like physical and communications infrastructure, security (before Mas Selamat), trade/commerce, and education (up to perhaps late 80s before the single-minded pursuit of grades). Of course, no one can dispute her “achievements” in keeping the opposition and electorate in check, in quashing dissension (I don’t know much about Lim Chin Siong, but I do know about Ong Teng Cheong, Chia Thye Poh and JB Jeyaratnam and if you want to learn about integrity, humility and love, you can learn from these men). She’s of course been excellent in curtailing power and resources in the hands of ordinary citizens, and extremely innovative in her brand of politics and public policy.
I have observed Dr Lee Siew Choh through my years growing up. I do not think he’s one who will destroy Singapore and to imply that the party led by Dr Lee would have impoverished Singapore is totally uncalled-for. In my mind, Dr Lee possessed more character and integrity than any of the current cabinet ministers.
It does seem that the MSM & her supporters have a habit of whacking persons who are no longer around to defend themselves. To that I say, “Grow up”
If Barisan Socialis had been a possible alternative govt to the PAP, then Singapore today would be more like Hong Kong or Taiwan economically, socially and politically. So long as the country is kept politically stable and has got keen and capable entrepreneurs like in Hong Kong, Taiwan, or South Korea then the country will flourish. Even China today, under their new political system, is flourishing well, indeed even faster than Singapore.
If Singapore has got two or more alternative political parties instead of just one, then no single party would become too powerful or dominating, and true democracy would be able to flourish, as in Hong Kong or Taiwan.
So long as there is the possibility of an alternative govt to take over, the present ministers would not have the audacity to pay themselves such obscene outrageous salaries.
Going back into history, if David Marshall did not step down, Singapore could have evolved into a 2-party democracy with Labour Front and PAP. The Barisan Sosialis members would have continued to remain under PAP instead of breaking away.
Since Paul addressed his questions to academics, then i’ll tell him how academics will answer this kind of question. they wont even bother because its all speculative and conjecturing. only a fortune teller will entertain our dear friend paul. wonder why Straits Times allows such trash to be published. its really an insult to our education system that people who write to the press cannot tell between a solid argument and a speculation.