Respect your Rights to defend your freedoms, your freedom from unreasonable, unconscionable demands, coercion, aggression, oppression and inducements.
Succumb not to the bullies and crafty people.

Wish there are more Singaporeans with principles like You.

I meant “favorable.” Sorry for the mistake.

76) Don’t blame, humans are social creatures & it’s natural that their thoughts will be shaped & affected by ever-evolving society that they live in.

Here’s a really good example. Some Singaporeans in the past wear tattoos as a symbol of gangsterism, & some Singaporeans tend to associate tattoos with gangsterism. Lately, Singapore has been exposed to the artistic nature of tattoos by other societies in other countries & more Singaporeans disassociate tattoos with gangsterism.

The link of tattoos to gangsterism has been cleared almost completely. However, the link of gaining more power & financial wealth to the only way to achieve success in life has not.

As long as the latter link is not cleared, governments will continue to use their people for their own good & not benefiting the citizens fairly.

I don’t want to be forced to contribute to a group, much less defend its leader, where despite my contributions & efforts, I can see old, unfed members who have contributed in their younger years.

your point is gladly accepted and would like You to know that the pack will maul and kill each other too when they fight within themselves for a bigger shares of fortunes and loots, this i can assure You, because it is the nature of greed.

The humankind supposedly is wise and concientious but inexplicably most are overwhelm by greeds. Can’t really blame mankind, even gods want to stay away from them by staying in heaven, they can’t stand the humankind. Think of it, gods are unkind and selfish too.

Humankind has discovered this fact too, but has evolved with an ever-increasing greed level. Some leaders (governments) of modern packs (countries) work against the members of their own pack (citizens) & set conditions unfavorable only to himself & use nationalism as a deceptive motivation for subjects’ loyalty.

Would you fight to defend a pack if the leader of the pack leeches off you & the pack mostly consist of members of other species?

Think natural. Think in the ways of a naturalist. That way, you can see through illusions perpetuated by society.

Now that I subscribe more towards political pragmatism as a intellectual, recognising that there is a need to strike a balance between theory and real life practice. of course, I also do refer to other theories as well.
Singapore under PAP is a very pragmatic society. PAP always stresses upon the need to be practical in policy making for the reality of Singapore. Indeed, I agree to majority of PAP policies – 50% to 60% . What I don’t agree , is the heavy handed methods on clamping down of opposition and the uneven playing field for opposition. I believe that it should be a fair fight. Nevertheless, nothing is absolutely fair in life.

Panache, I never really understood the song “imagine” by Lennon. Found it too idealistic . Perhaps it is utopia !

maybe when we come into contact with other alien life from other planets. misunderstandings might happen and worsen into conflict. Earthlings vs Aliens. Just like Qing dynasty Chinese came into contact with the British, war.

HG wells ” the time machine” – when I read it, the future of mankind came to me .
What will the unification of the world mean ? With global warming looming in the long term future, should the govts leave it to the scientists to take over to save the earth ? Only time will tell .

We are not a nation of scholars but people of near slave classes.

National defence does not only involve the learned nor it is the exclusive duty of the educated.

Please come down to layman level.

“I’m worried by your careless usage of the various -isms. The rather liberal (pun) employment of terms such as liberalism, realism, totalitarianism, institutionalism and even hyper-militarism is not going to help the discussion unless their precise meanings are understood. Or else, they just serve as convenient labels and badges of prestige.”

These terms and definitions are always going to be contested and they should be. Only undergrads like you hold on to terms memorised from textbooks like they’re gospel :)

Thanks for the clarification. I was thinking of those -isms more as political ideologies. Sorry to all.

However, even in the context of International Relations, the debate is more between Positivist and Post-positivist theories rather than between realism and liberalism as the latter 2 are both in the same Positivist camp. Liberalism as an IR theory is a largely incoherent one unless it is subsumed under Utopianism. So those who think they are the spokesmen for liberalism should reconsider their position.

I don’t think it’s accurate to say that you and I are both realists. If I can speak for myself, I do not pledge my loyalty strictly to any one theory. But I think, whether in politics, epistemology or IR, the realist position should form the foundation for any intellectual discussion. Or else, paralysis in discourse will ensue.

Hi smallvoice, we are using ‘realism’ and ‘liberalism’ here in the context of international relations.

Totally de senseless, Thanks for the kind words.

KJ, I am honored and surprised that you would want to know more about my military experience for your Phd research. Well, it is gonna be a long story of my 16 years. Above mentioned is only the introduction. You sure that you want my story ? Personally, I am now a aspiring researcher, intellectual of peace and professor wannabe. If God , fate and luck really permits me, I will go all the way to pursue Phd – field of study not decided yet. This time, it is not for academic competition rivalry with some people. It is really for myself. To push myself , to see how far can I go, for the hope of inspiring the next generation for the sake of a better future of humanity and our environment. lofty aspirations. kinda inspired by the audacity of hope expressed by President Obama. Since you are a political science student, What do you think of Obama ? By the way, which country do u study in ? Hope you can be more specific about your university in the email. thanks . Let exchange pointers. Here is my email . sgmilman@yahoo.com.sg

Can you decode my email name ? ? hahha

Panache – thanks for your comments. Frankly speaking, you remind me a bit of my old self before I became a militarist. not wanting to go to war. till being forced with no choice. Before I knew it, I got caught up in it and go into the kill . battle after battle , war after war. Let me get this straight, I am not totally against war. War is a means to an end, not the other way round. There are other ways to the end. War must be the last resort. I am well aware of the need of having a strong credible defence force.
Indeed, it was hard getting rid of my militaristic thinking. it is like my own personal weapon. Over the years, it has become institutionalized into my life. Now I am rethinking it for modifying a little bit to allow more freedom and creativity for my intellectual pursuits.

I’m worried by your careless usage of the various -isms. The rather liberal (pun) employment of terms such as liberalism, realism, totalitarianism, institutionalism and even hyper-militarism is not going to help the discussion unless their precise meanings are understood. Or else, they just serve as convenient labels and badges of prestige.

For eg, KJ’s proposition – “Realism vs liberalism is an age-old debate” – doesn’t quite make sense. Realism is not, by definition, not opposed to liberalism, but to idealism. Liberalism is more opposed to conservatism or authoritarianism.

We can go on and on like this … without much progress.

Thanks for sharing, Bernard.

Yes, nobody wants war. Maybe one day there will be no countries, like in John Lennon’s song…

“Within International Relations, the ‘realism’ espoused by people like smallvoice and panache are considered outdated”

Disagree. Political realism has and always will form the fundamentals of international relations. Liberalism is but an extension. This is exactly what Total Defense is by the way. Forge inter-dependence with other countries (liberalism) but insure against war (realism). I guess the success of liberalism has made people complacent…

I’m examining Total Defense as part of my PhD research (though it’s more about political theory), and it’d be great if I could ask you about your military experience. Could you kindly email me at cavalierioflute@yahoo.com ?

# 62 – You’re right. Realism vs liberalism is an age-old debate. Power/force is pertinent but that’s not to say they’re absolute, immutable, one-dimensional. Those who argue for radical change will always have to face the reactionaries who can’t see beyond the surface. But that’s just par for course.

Cheers : )

Within International Relations, the ‘realism’ espoused by people like smallvoice and panache are considered outdated. Hobbes and machiavelli might still be relevant, but they’re by no means the only perspective, let alone the only correct one.

ASEAN is an example of being a war-free zone for the last 3 decades not because of come crude national interest/balance of power but also liberal institutionalism and social norms.

The price of peace is eternal vigilance. High ideals can only be afforded by those who can defend them. As a military man, I thought you would understand that.

Has anyone read “The Lucifer Effect” by Dr Phillip Zimbardo? That book has forever opened my eyes to the nature of man, and it is not pretty.

SMRT, very likely being government-linked, attempts to solves the overcrowding problem caused by the government by removing seats in the train, not by increasing the frequency of trains. More people can squeeze into the train, but of course, at the expense of comfort.

The government attempts to solve the problem of road congestion caused by overcrowding caused by itself by increasing ERPs & maintaining or lowering the costs of vehicles. How is that supposed to help? More people will still get vehicles & cause heavier conditions on the road due to lower initial price of the vehicle. It only helps in generating more income for the company receiving the ERP payouts. The problem of road congestion is not being tackled at all.

Our commuting lives become more intolerable & yet the government doesn’t seem to care at all.

I believe life as a Singaporean under the current government is portrayed exactly the same way in NS. You are expected to have a leap of faith. You must believe in higher authorities blindly without questioning them. I personally find that disturbing.