Ravi Philemon
Chairman of the People’s Action Party (PAP)’s youth wing – the Young PAP (YP) – Mr Teo Ser Luck, led a five-member delegation to Beijing and met with the First Secretary of the Communist Youth League of China in February, 2009. (See here.)
Mr Teo, when asked if he was worried about YP associating with a Communist organisation, said: ‘We’re not worried because it’s the governing party and Singapore-China relations are so close. We don’t talk about political philosophy.’
In 1992, Deng Xiaoping praised Singapore as an orderly and well-managed country and said that China must not only learn from Singapore but must also surpass it. Perhaps for the Chinese communists the period of learning from Singapore is over and they have surpassed us. Presumably, it is we who now need to ‘learn’ from them and hence the visit to China by Mr Teo.
The fascination of the governing PAP with the Chinese communists also has historical precedent. During its infancy the PAP was regarded by many as a Communist front. In fact in its early formative years the PAP calculated that a united front with the communists was necessary to win the support of the Chinese educated public and gain power. This is no secret, as even the party website bears witness that the PAP “worked with communists in the early days”. The PAP and the CCP even have similar organizational structures: both use a cadre system where a core group of party “elders” hold all the power in the parties.
Mr Teo perhaps hopes to have his YP emulate the Communist Youth League of China, also known as the China Youth League (CYL). He said that the YP School – which was established in 2004 to train party activists – would take a leaf from the CYL in political education and leadership development. Mr Teo wants the YP School to put in place a training system that would – similar to the CYL – turn a new party recruit into an activist and eventually, a party leader.
Here is what the CYL’s aims are, according to this website:
The basic task of the CYL at the present stage is: Firmly and unswervingly implementing the Party’s basic line at the primary stage of socialism, to unite and lead the young people in adhering to the four cardinal principles with economic construction as the focus, and adhering to reform and opening up and working hard through self-reliance, to promote the development of productive forces and social progress and to foster successors with ideals, ethics, education and a sense of discipline in the great practice of building socialism with Chinese characteristics in an effort to transfuse new blood into the Party and bring about young construction personnel for the country.
While Mr Teo may want to have his YP learn from the CYL, he failed to realize that there several crucial differences between YP and CYL. The CYL still adheres to Marxism – the YP doesn’t have any ideology at all. CYL is a national organisation, that has recruits from every school, and future national leaders are groomed by the CYL. In contrast, YP doesn’t recruit from schools and its recruits have almost no chance of becoming national leaders as the PAP doesn’t recruit its Cabinet ministers from its rank-and-file. Furthermore, the ‘recruitment’ methods employed by the CYL are highly questionable. Many high school students are ‘enlisted’ in questionable circumstances as CYL members upon graduating from high school – and they do not find it easy to dissociate themselves thereafter.
For example, Li Yuanlong, a reporter for Bijie Ribao daily newspaper from Guizhou province in China, had this to say when he resigned from the CYL:
“I am Li Yuanlong, male, Han nationality, born in Guizhou’s Bijie City in 1960. On August 27, 1980, I reluctantly joined the Communist Youth League. Since then, I’ve accrued a moral debt, living with a guilty conscience. As of this moment, I formally declare my resignation of the CYL.”
Mr Li was subsequently arrested for “inciting subversion of state authority” charges and suffered two years imprisonment in 2005. (Source: Asian Research, “40 million quit the CCP”)
Will ‘recruitment’ from secondary schools and junior colleges be now modus operandi for YP? Will these new ‘recruits’ be groomed to become ‘activists’, perhaps to help the ruling party engage new media? Will these ‘activists’ be put through a grueling system of leadership development and political education, one that indoctrinates them with party philosophy and party history, to develop them into ‘leaders’? Will some of these ‘activists’ and ‘leaders’ come to regret their decision to join the party, much like Li Yuanlong?
If indeed Mr Teo hopes to copy the CYL’s recruitment and indoctrination plans, will it be effective? It may not have that much impact given how none of the current PAP leaders came from YP. For example, even George Yeo and Vivian Balakrishnan were only in YP because they had been parachuted there as YP chairmen! Furthermore, most YP members seem to have joined the party only to establish some sort of patron-client relationship, in the belief that helping out with the PAP can advance their own careers or ambitions.
Perhaps Mr Teo’s visit to the CYL and his abundant praises of the Chinese system has deeper economic implications? Prior to his departure for China, Mr Teo readily admitted that trips to build ties with one of the world’s largest economies would be “significantly beneficial when things [i.e. the Singapore economy] pick up”.
Even Walt Disney has realised that China is an untapped market and has enlisted the help of China’s 70 million CYL members to enter the Chinese market in 2004. (BBC news). The US entertainment giant then toured the Chinese youth centres to build awareness of the Disney brand. Jay Rasulo, president of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, said, “It’s one part of an overall brand building process”. Andy Milligan, of branding consultancy, Interbrand, describes Walt Disney’s move to woo China by engaging CYL as “a huge commercial opportunity for Disney” “There is an increasingly affluent middle-class in China,” he said, “so they have money to spend and money to travel.”
Does the ‘one-party’ model of China fire the imagination of the governing party of Singapore? The fear of instability is etched into the PAP’s psyche. The early formative years of Singapore, which were rife with leftist riots and ethnic conflicts, has contributed much towards such fears. The ruling party believes that one-party rule represents stability. But whatever the reasons, the question remains: “Will the fascination of the governing party with the Chinese communists pay dividends for them now as it did more than 50 years ago?”
———–
The CYL’s website is here.
The Young PAP’s website is here.
———–
Ravi Philemon also blogs at http://singaporesocialactivist.blogspot.com .
———–
Join TOC Facebook group where our writers share personal insights to the stories they report or write about.
———–
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
One way in which the pap can maintained its stranglehold on power and influence forever in Singapore is by institutionalising the capitalist dictatorship to be like that of the Chinese Communist State. Then they don’t have to fear that their controlled and manipulated systems will fail them to produce a freak election result.
Kind of ironic that the pap govenment had imprisoned many Singaporeans on the accusation that they are a danger to Singapore for being communists or communist sympathisers. Most notable of these are Lim Chin Siong, Chia Thye Poh and Dr. Poh Soo Kai.
Good Morning,
“We’re not worried because it’s the governing party and Singapore-China relations are SO close. We DON’T talk about political philosophy.’
If PAP seriously wants to recruit capable, smart and intelligent people into their ranks they should seriously consider taking constructive feed back and quickly get another person to head their youth wing.
The feedback on the ground is this chap just doesnt have the right stuff to gain the respect of the thinking crowd.
With Dr. Balakrishnan, although he needs to work on his EQ and brush up on his reading; he was often seen as a man that the thinking folk could work with. There was at least common ground. As although many of his decisions were not popular, they did make sense and he always came across in genuine in engaging the brainy folk.
But this fellow, no one knows what he is doing. I think he is a liability to PAP and someone at a higher level needs to seriously look into this deficit.
If you dont believe me, just take a white piece of paper and write out his statement slowly word by word and read it aloud a couple of times and you will see what I mean when I say, its just impossible.
Please try to take this feedback constructively.
SD (Internent liaison officer of the brotherhood)
Holy cow! I checked out young pap’s website, & read “STAYING TOGETHER . MOVING AHEAD.” Headlining the points under this section is “A Better Life For All.” A better life for all is definitely the BEST motto for any country. However, in the case of PAP which is always increasing its own revenue at the expense of citizens, they might be referring to better lives only for themselves & the elites.
Here are the points.
1) Create opportunities for Singaporeans
2) Give our young the best start
3) Encourage every citizen to play a role
4) Do more for lower-income Singaporeans
5) Help older Singaporeans to lead full & active lives
6) Provide affordable healthcare for all
I agree our young has good start especially in terms of education, which hopefully is available to everyone including the extremely poor.
Affordable healthcare? It’s affordable if you don’t suffer from major illnesses or disabilities.
The rest are pretty much poppycock. Opportunities for foreigners as well, to compete with Singaporeans.
Encouraging every citizen to play a role in being blindly loyal to the government & not questioning any form of unfairness dealt to individuals.
Doing more for lower-income families by increasing GST which affects everyone & reducing income taxes which higher income earners have to pay. Some of the poor who could not take it get to relief their suffering by committing suicide. In case you couldn’t tell, I was being sarcastic.
Here is my favorite. Help older Singaporeans to lead full & active lives. It’s great fun to have contributed to the country in your younger years & be forsaken by the government when you are old & not given elderly welfare benefits. You get to lead VERY active lives by working your asses off even at the ripe old age of 70.
I vaguely remember a Singapore army chant or cheer or whatever that goes “We don’t want no communist.” Eh, that’s pretty ironic, isn’t it?
China prosper even though it is a communist country.
Does this mean that Economic prosperity does not mean you need Democracy?
Yes / No ?
At different times, we have to sing different songs. Now Communists China is all powerfull in all front, they are the world big brother now so we have to pay homage and learn from them. If Obama disown us at least we have Big China to fall on. Simple and pragmatic, that is a way of life in PAP.
Whoever helps our party to grow and prosper is our good friends, whoever try to shake our hold on the people is our biggest enemy and should be put behind bars with no question asked. Follow this rules, we as a party will never be wrong. We shall survive eternally until our sacred island is sank by the great sea.
China is a big player in world economics today. China is the biggest holder of US government debt and has invested an estimated 70 per cent of its $2 trillion stockpile of foreign exchange reserves, the world’s largest, in dollar assets.
Wen Jiabao recently said, “We have lent a massive amount of capital to the United States, and of course we are concerned about the security of our assets. To speak truthfully, I do indeed have some worries … I would like…to once again request America to maintain their creditworthiness, keep their promise and guarantee the safety of Chinese assets.”
Checked out the YPAP’s site…..pugdragon you want to go take a look at their forums, and then clean your eyes over and over. No wonder it’s called YOUNG PAP….hey I’m not admitting I’m old…..but god the guys there are plain……childish?
And that site doesn’t even seem to be working. look at their blog, then Archives….it’s like a dead Newspaper stand. The latest story they had was due 16OCT 2006.
Read this funky document dated last year:
http://www.youngpap.org.sg/articleview.php?id=4021&mode=press&cid=5
I laughed when I read the part where they welcome scrutiny (CDCs pay is “confidential”/ I don’t know)….and also the part where they said they’d surprise my skepticism. (Sure I’d be surprised at the fact you could be doing worse than you already have.)
I’m never ever going there again….it doesn’t even seem updated regularly. And that just shows how interested they are in engaging the youth. And one more thing, after double checking again, the moderators doesn’t even seem to be creating threads or posting. What the Fug!?
Will they be indirectly sourcing for China talents to join Singapore politics just like they scouted for talents to join our sports.
YP’s association with the CYL is hardly surprising as it is perfectly consistent with PAP’s pragmatic philosophy. It will align itself with whatever that can bring it some useful advantage. It does not pledge allegiance to any specific ideology or principle.
So, it can be fiercely anti-communist one minute and it can act like dear socialist brothers with Chinese communists at the next. It all depends on PAP’s reading of the circumstances at any given time.
“YP’s association with the CYL is hardly surprising as it is perfectly consistent with PAP’s pragmatic philosophy.”
What so pragmatic about the idea of moving into future by looking backwards? Unless you can tell me putting a cone hat on someone and hanging a typewriter around his neck is some ultra pragmatic way to move a society forward – last time I checked that was a recipe for failure.
Fact of the matter is, if you want to emulate and learn from others inorder to re-engineer or transplant new ideas to revivify a system; then by all means go ahead; BUT choose a gold standard model; why even decide to set sights on China which happens to be a moribund dodo bird system is beyond me; maybe you should go to China and speak to some of the really educated people there to see what they really think about everything that is inspired by the CCP- then perhaps you will get a better picture of why this idea has to be closer to a perdition than salvation.
It ‘s so pragmatic it makes the whole idea of driving over a cliff sound quiant.
SD
smallvoice585 (#9),
In another words, PAP has no principle or backbone to fall back on.
i kinda disagree with singaporedaddy. Not that i am a supporter of PAP or Teo, but I have been to a dialogue session with this fellow hosting. I am not sure if he was genuine but he is certainly smart enough to put things in a very simple manner and get people to talk. Quite unlike other MPs. He was keen to engage the larger crowd than a few individuals. Maybe that is why he has the support on the ground. Those who are outspoken and wanted attention must have felt left out. I must say that is quite clever on Teo’s part not to be intimidating. Like the rest, I think it is just another pragmatic approach of PAP. They go whenever there is a place to do business, whether it is politics or economic.
I will not be surprised if China’s present leadership look at ours as wealthy prostitutes, and quietly in their own way truly despise them.
The Chinese leadership is well aware of their past history and the reasons why they have been held back as a nation.
Our money-face type of leaders is not something they wish to emulate.
I wish, I could reply to your post but my last post here was censored for reasons that I can only wonder no end abt – so I guess you win the argument 12) i not stupid on March 16th, 2009 6.26 pm
I think its best if we leave it at that.
SD (Internet Liaison officer of the brotherhood)
When I read this article in propaganda straits times, i was thinking PAP is getting serious now. Don’t you see that they are making changes that would build their members network. They are not associating themselves with communist but picking the best practises to attract members and build their forces. I heard more are joining them. what the heck, not sure if they know what they are getting themselves into. If someone is behind this YP strategy, the opp better don’t take it too lightly.
“Those who are outspoken and wanted attention must have felt left out.”
Now you are claiming that I want attention?
One thing notable Balakrishnan is that he will take you on; whether he brings the point home or not is not the issue; but he puts up a robust fight; and he sticks to his guns; this I think most thinking people respect including many of us in the brotherhood; believe it or not, we actually like to deal with ppl who regularly hammer us, it shows character; we may not agree with him; but at least we all respect him.
As for I Teo, I dont think we can work with him. As I said someone at a senior level needs to look seriously into this matter; if they fail to do so; do not be surprise why you cannot find talent.
SD (Internet Liaison officer of the brotherhood)
But like I said,
I apologize profusely for my error in 14) Singaporedaddy. March 16th, 2009 6.48 pm – it was not a censor; my nokia communicator could load the page. I am so sorry toc. SD
Singaporedaddy,
No need to apologise. We all make mistakes at times.. :)
singaporedaddy, not saying you seek attention but just sharing my views after attending the dialogue. No offence.
Your views may be right but i know teo has managed to draw in many young members who are very effective on the ground. He is behind the YP changes so far and we are watching him, not his pretty face but what he is trying to do. I did engage him in the dialogue. Its strange. You get a feeling he is two steps ahead, knows what he needs but he doesnt make you feel it and is selective and does not waste time. Maybe its his corporate background. With due respect to Vivian( i thought his EQ is ok), we never thought he was a threat in politics because he only appeals to a limited segment and you are probably right, only the thinkers, and maybe debaters. They do not form the masses. This teo is different and seems to have something deeper behind the pretty boy look. That is the clever part i was referring to. Anyway, end of the day, if YP can’t appeal, they are still back to square one whatever change they try to do and the vote is in my hands..heh
The shallowness of Mr. Teo’s response is appalling. Are not political ideologies important for associations? Would Mr. Teo have associated with the Saudi Arabia based ‘successful’ World Assembly of Muslim Youth; a non-governmental youth and student group, which is affiliated with the United Nations; with chapters in 55 countries? So what if it is the governing party? Would Mr. Teo have even claimed affiliation with the Workers’ Party of Korea? After all, they are the governing party of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea? So what if the relations are strong? Would the Mr. Teo have commented with such casualness if he had led the delegates to Syria with whom Singapore established diplomatic relations in May 2008?
I think as Singaporeans, be it politician or ordinary Joe, we have to be very careful about who we associate with, especially in these turbulent times where great power politics are alive and kicking..
There are always downstream ripples in other areas of foreign policy discourse where we might not anticipate any. Hence, I think we should tread wary when we deal with nations deemed as pariahs by the international community, and with ruling parties of nations that are not exactly fully in line with the national interest..
Good Evening 19) i not stupid on March 16th, 2009 7.50 pm,
“we never thought he was a threat in politics because he only appeals to a limited segment and you are probably right, only the thinkers, and maybe debaters. ”
Au contraire; how many people do you think removed the stone that let slip the face of the mountain that started the French revolution; do you want to know? 8 intellectuals. How many people were responsible for the winter revolution in 1919 that swept Lenin into power? 11. How many people do you think started the WW 2, less than 30 and how many ended it, no more than 8. How many countries control the world economy? 8. And the litany goes on.
What is my point?
There is no correlation between quantity and the factor of change; but there is a very strong nexus between capacity for change with the factor of quality; let us not fool ourselves that a mob alone can be of any use; if it lacks directional and instructional verve.
Quantity alone is not enough to win the day; if that were really true then Estrada and Thaksin would still remain in power; so these “thinkers” and “debaters” as you mentioned should never be dismissed so easily, as they have a hold over the collective consciousness – this is not a debate about elitism or smartocracy; it is really just a matter of what it takes to make power and politics work like a Swiss time piece; all the gears need to be aligned to the right ratio; you could even say, it is one of the keys to power; and though it is conceivable Ah Teo may certainly have the crowd on your side; but always be mindful, the crowd will always be a capricious animal and in some cases not necessarily rational either and every leader is subject to its vagaries; crowds can be swayed easily; so a smart man will put the swayers in his back pocket; why do you think the Romans coined the phrase: those who cannot be conquered, must be embraced.
It makes far more economic sense to have them on your side then against you – but what will you get, if you cannot even gain their respect?
As I said, someone at branch level needs to look into this matter very seriously -you would do well to heed my advisory – even Ravi who wrote this excellent article knows this only too well, otherwise why would he even bother to highlight the fissure in his excellent essay; it is so obvious for all to see, except perhaps those who r still admiring themselves and exclaiming – mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?
Go take my advice – I give it on good faith.
SD
Dear #10 Singaporedaddy,
I’m puzzled as to why you thought that Teo’s mission to China is to learn some new and forward-looking ideas to revitalize his own organization. You are imposing your own Enlightenment assumptions onto Teo’s thinking.
If you truly understand the concept of pragmatism, you will realize that it is not restrained by common reason or the ameliorative quest for progress. It’s main foci are the objective that it wants to achieve and the effectiveness in its realization. To the CYL, the true Chinese intellectual is not their target. Just like for YP, trawling for political talent is not their purpose for recruiting members. There are more politically-important and strategic motives that you should appreciate.
Because of this parallel in their raison d’etre, YP is now learning from CYL as the latter has been in this game much longer.
Dear #20 Ravi Philemon,
You said – “The shallowness of Mr. Teo’s response is appalling. Are not political ideologies important for associations?”
I believe that Mr Teo’s response is neither shallow nor appalling. I think Mr Teo is smarter than both of us put together. His answer is calculated and deliberately ambiguous.
We always think that China is communist and Singapore is not. Actually, it is a case of 2 pragmatic parties ostensibly adopting 2 different ideologies conveniently for the same political objective. And that objective is the authoritarian exercise of political power – nothing more, nothing less.
I wonder who is learning from who? Both are unabashed dictatorships. Only one has popular elections every 5 years as a wayang show, the other not (only NPCC which are not peasants based). Both think they have a legitimate ruling mandate as long as they deliver the goodies. In SIN, LKY said in between the 5 years, you peasants try not to be an annoyance and an irritant. If his son’s A team can’t perform, just talk a lot of cock, distract the peasants’ attention, do some wayang, develop a thick skin and hide behind high walls.
Good Evening Smallvoice,
Understand this. There is no such thing as a concept of pragmatism – please what are you going on about? What do you take me for? I was under the impression we are having an intelligent conversation?
If you dont believe me you can go and check with any politic scientist – pls dont try to elevate a mere word beyond its dictionary meaning; when you use words like “foci” – “raison d’etre” you are inadvertently putting it on the same footing as lets say Juche, Gandhianism, Pancasila, Marxism and the like.
That is the main trouble with PAP; they have premised their entire hegemony on a single word i.e pragmatism – that is what happens when you take a word beyond the ambit of its normative logic; somewhere down the line when you stretch it too far; it loses its elasticity and meaning; instead its transformed into a fait accompli and something that is very close to religion, where it cannot be critically questioned without being labelled an idiot – the whole idea would ONLY make sense, if it didnt remind me of primitive folk worshipping a coke bottle thrown out from a passing aeroplane somewhere in the heart of darkness in Africa.
Have you ever considered why the founding fathers of the American constitution did not say; cincai lah, no need to be so losoh, lets just compress everything into one happy word, no need for a bill of rights la, we want to go back and play snake and ladders; why do you think they laid out in clear and unambigious terms very specific principles pertaining to the rights of man? Why did they not say, the govt of the day can do anything they want providing there is a cost/ benefits/trade offs etc? Why did they even make it impossible for the legislature, executive and judiciary to alter, foreclose and decamp from these timeless principles?
Could it be because they realized only too well; if man is left to his own devices, he can always be counted on to be pragmatic?
As the author said China is a lousy role model. I would go further and even say, it would be a tragedy if we emulate them.
Contrary to your statement, “there are more politically-important and strategic motives that you should appreciate.” I am not aware of ANY as Ah Teo never bothered to explain to all of us, so how are we supposed to read his mind?
As for “CYL has been in this game much longer.” Big deal. Primates were the first species to be blasted into space; do you see any monkeys building rockets to go to Mars?
Thank you & Good night
SD
A PSC Scholar affiliated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told me he had to be part of the Singapore Delegation to North Korea Communist Dictator Kim Jong Ill’s birthday as part of his 2005 summer internship program.
smallvices585 what has (27) got to do with SD’s reply to you in (26)?
Like cutting through butter with a hot knife.
passerby (#28)
SD’s reply in #26 is for smallvoice585. #27 is just a response to the TOC article and not a reply to any of the comments.
passerby, you are confused between me and smallvoice
After being fascinated with all things western and screwed by the western con men and banking institutions, (and still may be screwed by the new bunch of ang mo CEOs in town) attention is diverted to China to do the distraction work.
A delegation is now in the Middle East…..
Next ,another delegation may head to India….
GE is just round the bend…..it is on.
Its a shame we called ourselves democratic when Lee Kuan Yew has shown himself that he is a supreme leader of Singapore.
Dear #26 Singaporedaddy,
(i) You said – “There is no such thing as a concept of pragmatism”! Did you really say that? If you care to look through the history of philosophy, Pragmatism is one of its major movements.
You further said – “pls dont try to elevate a mere word beyond its dictionary meaning”! Am I hearing you right? We are discussing politics here – obviously we need to go beyond the meaning of ordinary words. We need to examine abstract ideas, ie concepts such as the application of Pragmatic philosophy to political practice.
(ii) You are obviously a fan of the American Constitution. I may or may not be one too. But the American Constitution is for the USA only, not for any other country. Since we have a right to self-determination, Singapore has its own Constitution and is not obligated to xerox the American one.
(iii) You further said – ” I am not aware of ANY (more politically-important and strategic motives) as Ah Teo never bothered to explain to all of us, so how are we supposed to read his mind?” Oh my! Do you need the protagonist to spell out his thoughts in big letters to you for you to know anything?
To discuss politics, you need to do a little analysis on your own.
LKY has always boasted that he’s a ‘street fighter’ who took on the commies in the 60s in Singapore. But when asked which world leader he admires most, he says Deng Xiaoping. For all their condemnation of communism, the PAP actually operates like a communist party, from their uniforms, their central executive committees, and addressing each other as ‘comrade’ in gatherings!!
Politics are dirty business everywhere. The dirtier they get, the more they gain, its all about money and power to stay to manipulate.
Dear #26 Singaporedaddy,
(i) You said – “There is no such thing as a concept of pragmatism”! Did you really say that? If you care to look through the history of philosophy, Pragmatism is one of its major movements.
[name me a treatise, book or seminal study on pragmatism and I will gladly pack up and shut up}
You further said - “pls dont try to elevate a mere word beyond its dictionary meaning”! Am I hearing you right? We are discussing politics here - obviously we need to go beyond the meaning of ordinary words. We need to examine abstract ideas, ie concepts such as the application of Pragmatic philosophy to political practice.
[show me the book then we will take it from there]
(ii) You are obviously a fan of the American Constitution. I may or may not be one too. But the American Constitution is for the USA only, not for any other country. Since we have a right to self-determination, Singapore has its own Constitution and is not obligated to xerox the American one.
[48 countries follow it - why should we reinvent the wheel? Can you give me one reason why? Singapore may have its own constitution but does it apply it constitutionally - you are missing the point]
(iii) You further said – ” I am not aware of ANY (more politically-important and strategic motives) as Ah Teo never bothered to explain to all of us, so how are we supposed to read his mind?” Oh my! Do you need the protagonist to spell out his thoughts in big letters to you for you to know anything?
To discuss politics, you need to do a little analysis on your own.
[disagree very strong, on record Ah Teo did not bother to even flesh out a rationale, let alone philosophy as to why he is doing the things he is doing - we pay taxes not to play Nostradamus; we pay taxes to get value for money; if he wants to go to china that is fine - but please share with us what is your rationale, philosophy and expect return on energy - this is not too much to ask as a tax payer - unless he thinks that I am his Ah Kong to sponsor him on foreign trips which he doesnt even care to provide an explanation for.
As I said, this man lack the metier, he is lacking in the cut - someone at branch level needs to seriously look into this]
SD (Internet liaison officer of the brotherhood)
Life is not so simple; you dont jump and I just follow you.
smallvoice585,
Do you have a good idea who among the Singaporedaddies is the real one?
Dear #36 Singaporedaddy,
(i) It is actually common general knowledge that Pragmatism is one of the great movements of philosophy since Charles Sanders Peirce first broached the idea in 1878.
If you really need to read the actual texts to convince yourself of its existence, I’m truly at a loss as to what to recommend you – because the bibliography is so long it can fill a small book! Ok, maybe look at William James’ “Pragmatism: A New Name for some Old Ways of Thinking” and Cheryl Misak’s “Truth, Politics, Morality: Pragmatism and Deliberation” as representative of the different camps of the Pragmatic argument.
(ii) If you think having our own Constitution is re-inventing the wheel, and that we should mindlessly follow the crowd of 48 other countries, may I just suggest that you re-read this sentence a few times and hopefully realize how ludicrous this is.
(iii) Your insistence that you will not know anything unless told directly and simply by anybody about anything is truly disappointing. Paying taxes does not entitle you to be spoon-fed!
Dear #38 smallvice585,
You may be right. There seems to be a variability in the standard of postings by “Singaporedaddy”. Perhaps they are posted by different people. But, I’m not really interested in such mindless games.
Hey waz wrong with CCP?
They trying to help the needy
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/world/asia/19vouchers.html?ref=world
PAP believes in corporate welfare as evidenced by Job Credit Scheme, where job saving is not the main aim.
So maybe CCP will teach PAP to be pro-poor?
40) smallvoice585 on March 19th, 2009 12.28 am
There is no need to insult me or to claim that I am mentally unstable or have made multiple postings, you can check this matter up with Andrew Loh, he will verify everything that I have said here is true –
Back to the point: You said here: 33) smallvoice585 on March 17th, 2009 5.26 pm – there is a school of thought called pragmatism and all I asked you to give me the title of this book.
I did NOT even ask for ten books, or even five or even three books – all I asked of you was ONE book.
And you cannot even give me a straight answer. Instead what you do is deflect the whole issue by coming up with a smart alec comment that is designed to side line the issue.
My question still stands and this is for the record.
Like I said someone at PAP branch level seriously needs to look at the lack of Ah Teo. I believe if they do not take this seriously. Then it is very unlikely for PAP to get the support of the thinking folk.
If you want I will even print out this whole thread and post it up as a whole article – what do you think?
SD (Internet liaison officer the brotherhood)
39) smallvoice585 on March 19th, 2009 12.21 am
“It is actually common general knowledge that Pragmatism is one of the great movements of philosophy since Charles Sanders Peirce first broached the idea in 1878.”
Wrong! I am NOT asking you whether pragmatism is a philosophy; read my question carefully again please @ 36) Singaporedaddy on March 18th, 2009 7.39 pm.
FYI there is even a philosophy on the life cycle of an ameoba, but just because it is published doesnt mean any country on this planet is using it to run their monetary system or balance their fiscal cost of capital.
I am asking you for something very pragmatic that can be meaningfully applied to the entire gamut that makes up the whole idea of govt in the form of executive, legislature and judiciary – ie a book where pragmatism as a body of knowledge is commonly used as governing principle of statecraft like lets say keynesianism or Adams Smith, wealth of the nations -instead you provided me with a washing machine manual and the toto almanac – by giving me a book on the subject of pragmatism.
Another thing. No one here expects to be spoon fed. But as a tax payer. I would have expected someone who decides to troupe off to China to explain what is his objective, goal and expected return on investment – I do not believe this is an unreasonable request.
If you could show please show me one article, website or even so much as a graffitti in some cubicle of a gents washroom where he might have even scribbled his grand plan to go back to China like Sun Wokung then maybe all of us here will not be so confounded by his incomprehensible actions. And this article by Ravi would not even have been required – If as you say the request for information = spoonfeeding, then I take exception to your statement and once again this can only point to a serious deficit. And I would seriously expect someone at the branch level of PAP to look into my complaint concerning the general and perceived lack of Ah Teo.
Again please, where is the book? I really want to understand. Pls dont waste my time, I took 5 minutes off my busy schedule to engage you.
SD
#26 Singaporedaddy looks suspicious.
I share some of the views here and don’t think there is anything wrong with learning from parties with a longer history. Singapore has always been doing that. That explains our success today.
As far as I am concern I support what Mr. Teo has been doing so far. He is doing a good job. As his ex-colleague, I had the priviledged to know him better. I have seen how he rallied the company to go through some tough times. He also stood up for the staff even if he has to risk his career. Not many bosses would do that but he would do it. I would rather follow a leader like him than anyone else.
OK I think, I have been patient enough with you smallvoice585 . Do you mind ravi philemon if transfer some parts of this post and thread to make up an article. I have just been told that Darkness would like to write about this matter and perhaps even look into this matter further issue of the general lack of Ah Teo.
We will take the contents of the thread as well.
As a matter of courtesy, I think it only fair the we should inform you.
SD (Internet liaison officer of the brotherhood
Singaporedaddy@46: Please do go ahead…
TOC
What abt removing the conversation between smallvice585 and Singaporedaddy that is irrelevant to this article? Put it somewhere else.
#45 Insights
Suppose this is organised by the people involved in May 21st 1987 (operation spectrum victims). What do you think the Govt will do? Applaud them? One more question, why is our Govt not doing the same (learning from parties with a longer history), by sending a team to learn from the democratic first world countries?