Deborah Choo
“The price to Singapore of the PAP’s extraordinarily successful half-century of governance is that the system is now particularly vulnerable to the internal self-renewal of the PAP itself.” – Ho Kwon Ping.
International journalists, students, officials, bankers and representatives from established institutions gathered at the National Museum Gallery Theatre yesterday afternoon. They were there for the inaugural Asia Journalism Fellowship (AJF) seminar organized by the Temasek Foundation, Nanyang Technological University (NTU).
The session was chaired by Cherian George, a researcher at the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information,NTU. The seminar was titled, “Singapore Beyond Lee Kuan Yew: Institutionalising The Singapore Way”.
The event brought together two distinguished guest speakers, namely Kishore Mahbubani, Dean and Professor of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, and Ho Kwon Ping, Executive Chairman, Banyan Tree Holdings; Chairman, Singapore Management University; Chairman, MediaCorp Pte Ltd.
Mr Mahbubani raised three pertinent issues. Firstly, whether it is legitimate to pose the question of Singapore’s prospects beyond Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. Mr Mahbubani acknowledged that many internationally had raised similar concerns, some expressing pessimism over Singapore’s future after MM Lee; one being Professor Samuel Huntington, who had said: “The honesty and efficiency that Senior Minister Lee has brought to Singapore are likely to follow him to his grave. “
Mr Mahbubani feels that the question boils down to MM Lee being an “extraordinary leader”, who is admired as a nation builder, an international statesman, and an effective and persuasive leader.
MM Lee’s legacy
Second, what has Singapore done to ensure that MM Lee’s legacy will be protected? Mr Mahbubani listed seven measures undertaken, namely an “exceptional” education system, national service, strong public institutions, a political party who had “learnt the art of winning elections”, ethnic harmony, meritocracy, and stamping out corruption.
However, when it came to the question of a Singapore after MM Lee, his take was that no one can be sure what this will be. He speculated three scenarios, one: a seamless transition, second: a significant reversal of the legacy left by MM Lee, and third: PAP continues to rule Singapore, but with a strong opposition force.
Mahbubani emphasized that Singapore must be able to conceive the notion of failure, so as to prevent the country degenerating. This was something which former Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Goh Keng Swee, had told him, after the PAP’s monopoly of Parliament was broken in 1981. “As (Dr Goh) has wisely told us, failure happens when we fail to consider the possibility of failure,” said Mr Mahbubani.
Mr Ho Kwon Ping felt that MM Lee had already passed the first test all great leaders faced, which is to personally engineer the transition to the next generation of leaders. However, whether MM Lee’s legacy would last beyond several generations, to become “enshrined in lasting, sustainable institutions”, is still unknown, Mr Ho said.
Singapore “stable, but static”
He is, however, confident that Singapore will see a new generation of leaders coming forth in the self-renewal process. But Mr Ho raised doubts over whether the PAP will continue to advance its current one-party dominance by producing its future leaders in which Singaporeans may or may not support in the future. His other concern is whether tomorrow’s generation can weather a change in the political climate which may see more opposition entering the scene.
He described Singapore’s political equilibrium as “stable, but static”, and feels that a multi-party political system would serve to benefit Singapore. He, however, maintained that “intentionally dividing the
PAP into two sister parties taking turns at the polls to lead the country, is an artificial, unworkable idea.”
Singapore vulnerable to PAP’s internal self-renewal
He cautioned that though Singapore has enjoyed good governance in the past 50 years, it has inevitably also made us particularly vulnerable to the “internal self-renewal of the PAP itself”. Citing China’s political system, he said, “We do not know the process by which Xi Jin Ping, a relatively unknown heir apparent to President Hu Jin Tao, was assessed, tested, and then given the mantle of succession. But a system of internal competition, evaluation, and selection clearly exists. And the system, however non-transparent, is sustainable and meritocratic – and it works.”
Echoing Mr Mahbubani’s stand on a Singapore beyond MM Lee, he concluded, “The only possible answer, since we have not yet crossed that bridge, is that we do not know. But future leaders will certainly not enjoy the huge political legitimacy arising from approval by Lee Kuan Yew.”
Mr Ho expressed uncertainty over the one-party dominance in the post Lee Kuan Yew era, but said that should it succeed, “they will have created a new model of political governance which will genuinely challenge the fundamental assumptions of Western liberal democracy with its requisite two-party model.” He remains confident that the future generation will “rise to the occasion” when the time calls as their “sense of belonging is strong”.
The younger generation
When TOC asked him on his views on the impact of the brain drain in Singapore, Mr Ho said he is not too worried about this, as all Singapore youths want to see the world, but they would return eventually.
Mr Ho disagreed that Singaporean youths are apathetic, as they “may be disinterested in electoral politics, but they are increasingly involved in civil society and community issues.”
The only difference is that the media medium used to air their views is different from that of the older generation. He said, “They seek expression not in Speakers Corner but in alternative digital media and social networking sites.”
The government realizes that it cannot control the new media, and it is good that the government is engaging in discussions at the grassroots level to find out more about it, he told TOC.
Addressing the government liberalizing its hold on the mainstream media, Mr Ho felt that the government has and is adopting a “pragmatic” approach to satisfy the younger generation’s thirst for democracy, but also being cautious not to upset the heartland, nor “endangering” social stability.
Citing the heated debates over gay rights and the Public Order Act, Mr Ho argues that “incremental change is happening.”
“The society Lee Kuan Yew has shaped will not, as Prof Samuel Huntington predicted, follow him to his grave,” he said. “It may not look like the Singapore of Lee’s time, nor may the PAP rule un-interrupted forever, but the people of Singapore, the nation they inhabit, and the society they continue to shape, will thrive so long as our children know that the future of Singapore belongs to them.”
—–
Picture of speakers from Straits Times.
Read also: “Yes we can (survive)” by The Straits Times.
And: Possible Singapores, beyond LKY by 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
aiyoyo
so many talks by the elites
if they’re really capable, then show the man on the street,
that these elites can recover the economy asap,
and ensure the commoners that life will be better than now. can they?
aiyoyo
# 27) David
‘ PAP falls doesn’t mean Singapore will fall. This scare tactic is another way to help them hold into power. Time to have two party system, ………………………..’
……………………………………………………………..
On the contrary, if and when the PAP fails in the future Singapore will fall. It took Argentina about 80 years to decline from one of the ten richest country of the world to bankruptcy and had to be rescued by IMF & World Bank. Like Singapore, it had a dominant party, a totalitarian government and attained First World status.
If that country with so much land and natural resources could go bankrupt what about Singapore in another generation when the PAP becomes corrupt and inefficient with a very weak opposition. Can LKY guarantees PAP’s incorruptibility and efficiency forever?
Hi Edward,
What Argentina teaches us is that a competitive multi-party democracy is the only way to hedge Singapore from PAP and reduce Singaporeans’ vulnerability to PAP MPs.
if LKY rise from grave lah
LKY or no LKY – what difference does it make if totalitarian laws like the POA stay in place??
Well we can’t call it a dictatorship anymore cause the dictator is gone. But it will still be an authoritarian state.
And will the nervousness stay in the PAP? Can we sure that they won’t break down in fear and tamper with their newly bought e-voting machines?
Mad93
I do not thank Mr Lee for all that he has done. I respect and admire the abilities that allowed him to achieve all that. That said, he is a self-professed pragmatist. He doesn’t put across the impression that he either needs or values our thanks. I feel that he brought Singapore up the ladder because that goal was aligned to his self-interest and the interest of his fledgling party. That is my opinion now, though it wasn’t always so. The long string of uncontested legislation restricting freedoms implies that legislative powers are in part being used to entrench existing government. How much of that is attributable personally to Mr Lee, I do not know. However, the unconvincing justifications given, along the lines of “paying me more is good for you”, simply strikes me as disingenuous, and rankles, sometimes more than if they had simply balls out told us they are meant to muzzle the opposition.
The greatest leaders in history are a mix of those who achieved greatness through inspiration, and those who achieved the same with a iron fist. I admire the first category more, as by definition I must, while the latter variety places very little value on admiration.
And so right now we flail along hoping that current good governance will continue?
I sucked in a breath at this because, frankly, out there how many people want to logically consider the implications of MM Lee passing away?
But we gotta realise he’s not immortal, the man’s 87. That’s a grand old age for any one. With all due respect I’m sure and I do hope that he lives for a good while yet, but in 2015? 2020, even? What will Singapore be like? Not too far away, mind you.
I am similarly amused by how Kishore Mahbubani talks almost as though MM Lee is still PM.
Can someone guarantee a party will perform in future based on the past where the people of the past may not be there in the future as in leaders come and go with time but the party is an organization that is not a human?
funny right, my way of saying? sorly my england no strength.
One has to understand the history of KM to understand why he is a strong defender of the Singapore model.
Messages are not shaped in vacuum.. the people behind the words have life experiences that help us to understand why they are supportive of certain ideals and so on.
If most of us were in his shoes, we might actually be the same doughty defenders too.
Plopp,
A blunt question for you. Do you wish for Mr Lee to keep on living for his sake – or your own?
The policies that Mr Lee and his team have put in place have the inertia of an entire country. The institutions he has built, cultural and physical, have minds of their own, not to mention the resources and power to safeguard their own survival. I am not too worried about the fallout from Mr Lee’s eventual passing on their account.
On good governance, it is one claim that the government makes that is totally irrefutable. If it were say, America we are talking about, we could look to the multitude of polls and voices in the print media to gauge sentiment and render judgment. In Singapore, the government sets the agenda, determines the KPI, consolidates the results and presents the verdict. There is nothing for you to affirm or refute. It is as meaningful as saying Japan is a nice country.
Can there be an alternative form of governance that also qualifies as “good”? The point is this: If you wanted to find out, you couldn’t. Not in Singapore.
People are malleable. If you only have cheese to sell, you would naturally endeavour to sell also the idea that cheese is all you need. And people would believe you, for a time. But the reality is that cheese is not all you need. People wake up to the realisation eventually. As I see it, right now, we do not have the freedom to choose anything else but cheese. I believe that people can learn to choose wisely. They do not always have to be marshalled and have their choices made for them.
Obnani at #33
Nice one!
Here’s another one, posted by another reader calling himself “Yesterday is not Today and Today is not Tomorrow” on 14th March 14th, 2009 6.44 pm
Quote:
“Let us get down to fundamentals.
Is this an open, or is this a closed society? Is it a society where men can preach ideas – novel, unorthodox, heresies, to established churches and established governments – where there is a constant contest for men’s hearts and minds on the basis of what is right, of what is just, of what is in the national interests, or is it a closed society where the mass media – the newspapers, the journals, publications, TV, radio – either bound by sound or by sight, or both sound and sight, men’s minds are fed with a constant drone of sycophantic support for a particular orthodox political philosophy?
I am talking of the principle of the open society, the open debate, ideas, not intimidation, persuasion not coercion…”
- by Lee Kuan Yew, Malaysian Parliamentary Debates, Dec 18, 1964.
Hi guys,
What do you expect ?
One is a retired civil servant given a new lease of life in the university and on government payroll.
The other is the chairman of Media Corp, albelt he has his own business.
Sigh………
“Mr Mahbubani listed seven measures undertaken, namely an “exceptional” education system, national service, strong public institutions, a political party who had “learnt the art of winning elections”, ethnic harmony, meritocracy, and stamping out corruption.”
Mahbu – you are nothing but a cheap turncoat who has sold yr soul! Art of winning elections? Yeah, we know what it is! Jailing adversaries on drummed up charges, suing them till they’re bankrupt, banning them, withholding privileges, hounding them by seizing assets, gerrymandering, buying votes with HDB upgrading plans, muzzling them, threatening their livelihoods, and many more such machinations.
Well spoken, Mr Ho! You are more in tune with the times than that cheap staid stiffneck Mahbu!
you have only yourselves to blame, for giving them a blank cheque to do whatever they like
Catherine, dear dear Catherine, oh so so naive.
If at least a member of the Opposition were one of the speakers there would be a modicum of credibility. If critics of the Government were sharing the same platform that is the day that Singapore has matured and come of age. In the meantime it is still in playschool in the sand pit, or worse.
Food for thought:
Mugabe was once a freedom fighter, putting his life on the line for his fellow Africans in Rhodesia. (And he has multiple university degrees from British universities too!!)
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. (Baron Acton)
I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it. (Voltaire)
What are Singaporean values as a society? What are the guiding principles? After so many year’s of independence do we know, do we care? Is fairness one of the values that Singaporeans hold dear? How have we evolved as a society?
Me, I’d much prefer fairness over more and more and bigger and bigger material belongings any time, any day!!!
Kishore is absolutely right about LKY being an extraordinary leader, how else to explain why subsequent PMs still need LKY around, of course to hold their hands, gives them confidence.
I concur with Kishore Mahbubani’s view of LKY’s legacy.
1) Our exceptional education system indeed has produced many smart people, they think like LKY and agree with him on almost everything…. we are reaping the benefits of having so many wise men and women.
2) National Service has enabled our young men to learn about defending the country. So many making up the numbers as reservists and this large number will act as a deterrent to potential enemies. Does not matter if more than 50% think it is a waste of time and will not hang around when it is crunch time.
Just hope our enemies do not call our bluff.
3) The PAP has the best track record in the world for winning elections, sure as hell they know the art of winning….a great lesson to all citizens that winning justifies whatever means, even if it is cheating, intimidation, bribing and using double standards in applying laws….sometimes only and not all the time lah!
4) PAP’s meritocracy has ensured only the talented are holding important appointments….81 PAP MPs says it all, even if all are rather quiet in parliament.
Well, we should expect this, because the country is so well run, there is nothing much for these MPs to criticize. The greatest aspect of PAP’s meritocracy is being fearless with regards to conflict of interest, i.e. family ties should not stop the best from reaching the apex in any field…..and we are reaping the benefits.
5) There is this masterful stroke in using money to stop greed for money.
So we can rest easy none of our top politicians will be corrupted since he/she is amongst the highest paid in the world, some say universe as well.
6) Notice there is little transparency and accountability. Well folks, LKY’s legacy is about trust. All the men put in place can be trusted. They have been screened.
So you must give them the benefit of the doubt, even to blowjob artist like Kishore Mahbubani.
The debate should be on keeping LKY’s legacy intact, and we Sporeans will surely get the golden period we deserve. lol
Opening up of Singapore started with GCK talk , talk, talk…now he is almost quiet on all fronts except some talk about his lady member GRC, and now talking abroad – in italy!
No talk about Dr Ong or Geylang Serai
Actually turned out to be a closed Singapore, and now with all the amendments in the laws – going to be a locked up place soon
After GCK, the government now try to get others – retiree and another rich man to talk , talk, talk….
Why ? To your surprise he may outlast the world and live for eternity?
Everythingy is possibility , righty?
We respect the man for what he has achieved — and the greatest thing he has done for Singapore and Singaporeans is this: We can go anywhere in the world and those who have heard of Singapore, hold us in high regard. A Singapore pasport is rsepcted in most countries, Singaporeans are allowed to enter most countries, without the need for a visa. The same cannot be said for other countries in the region.
But I am sad that with all he has achieved, he wil not be desctribed as a leader who was loved by his people.
It is the emotional lot that makes the most noise
Respect what the man has achieved for singapore but I am not sure how great is our system. He has created a system that has a single point of failure. History has it that any system/rulers no matter how great, it will fail one day. unfortunately, we are unlike other countries who have alternative political parties to backup.
Hope some days our system will change and when one fails there is another alternative govt to take over smoothly, just like the Americans. Maybe we need a 3- party system, when one party plays monkeys there are 2 to check on them. Now we have none to check them, its too dangerous a system.
Change for the better for singaporean may come after he expires.
The premise is that our small population is already posing self-renewal challenges for the PAP itself (to continue generating economic growth which is extremely difficult for Singapore), and so it defeats the purpose of using competition in a multi-party system as a means of candidate selection.
I think this is what pro-opposition people disagree, although I don’t know how many really think it is untrue, and how many are just using this as a way of attacking the PAP.
Luxembourg has a population of less than a million, and has the highest GDP per capita in the world. It is also a parlimentary representative democracy (with a constitutional monarchy).
Peter seller #61
i did not realise it was LKY’s speech till i see his name. It sounded so much like a current day opposition member/person would say about present day Singapore. Amazing!
X #72
just curious. They always say that SG is so small with so few talents therefore cannot afford to have 2 parties. What about Israel? Israel has a population of about 7 million and they have a very robust paliamentary system and somemore in the mist of constant war and fighting with its neighbour.
A country that is constantly engaged in real war/fighting with its neighbouring entities can “afford” to have the freedom of its citizens to express oneself to such an extent that it gave rise to strong opposition parties, a true paliamentary democracy. The country still functions. The people can have their say, voted, and go fight wars at the same time.
i think in SG, if we happen to have some major skirmish with say M’sia or Indonesia (touchwood), the PAP will first declare a state of emergency. Abolish all opposition parties in the name of unity and maybe declare ourselves as communist (“New communist” as in “New Labour”!) after all China is progressing so much it is not tooooo far fetch to abandon westminster model for the PRC model, Asian values mah, some more same colour.
PAP = PRC communist party.
Long live PAP.
Game over.
question: can the above scenario happen? Can our constitution prevent PAP from doing this?
Hi,
i actually respect and admire prof Kishore and Mr Ho very much.
The former, i enjoy reading his geo blah blah blah (i picked this up from FP, so naughty) very much from the straits times. Sorry TOC friends, i still read the MSM.
As for Mr Ho, i read from somewhere he had a brush with socialism when he was a juvenile but now is a serious business man. I respect him because he has found the meaning of life. Seriously.
#73,
Does Luxembourg have SM , MM ? How much is their PM ‘s pay ??
70) GABRIEL on April 22nd, 2009 2.50 pm
“But I am sad that with all he has achieved, he wil not be desctribed as a leader who was loved by his people.”
Yes, sad indeed that he may not be remembered or be described as a leader well loved by the citizenry. There is no perfection in life either. Iron fist ruling does takes its toll after decades had past. Singapore “success” came with a heavy price tag. My generation of people (from the 50s) had been submissive (diplomatically speaking ~ being rational in thinking for the sake of the nation and our family, a compromised had been made whether you are coerced into it or otherwise) for a long time, however, this cannot be said for the younger generation of people who are more educated and exposed (and might I add want to have more say with their life and why not). I am making an educational guess that only the Top 20 precincts of the citizenry embraced this current system as it is tipped towards their favor. This is how things had developed and perceived by a large majority. The gap had widened and is ever harder to bridge and it has a lot to do with the mindsets and the capabilities of the current batch of leaders. They had produced nothing closed to this old man that even some of the most avid opposing intellect will endorse within the rationale frame work (albeit openly denouncing the necessary hard core repressive actions taken). This old man is an unapologetic collective and tactical authoritarian who mean business as he sees it. It is exactly this kind of hard core characteristic and the perceived ineptness of the current batch of leaders that arouse people into thinking what will happen with his passing on.
As I had commented earlier, I do not think things will change internally within the first 10 years (and if I may, I would term it as adjustment period). Will Singapore survive the first 10 years after his demised? I think yes albeit some feathers may be ruffled. There might be an attempt to challenge the supremacy of the stewardship (but oddly enough, I personally envisage this coming within its internal mangling rather than from any insurgent force). However, it will be a crucial transiting 10 years to enrich the current system with new “hopefully liberal” ideas and or “hopefully citizenry centric” policies that are in line with today’s changing world, this will be carried out by none other than the current government where their internationality influence is yet to be tested (without the presence of this articulate, charismatic, devoted, iron fist, temperamental, uncompassionate and what not… state man). That is indeed a big question mark.
Rhetorically as it may sound, It is a complex and intricate web that old man and his team of old guards (many had since passed on or will be) had engineered for any successor to traverse. One wrong move and we may see the unwinding of the woven “titanium” thread that this web was weaved.
Singapore is no longer the secluded under developed tiny red dot (that is a fact that we have to accept whether you agree or disagree with the current ruling governing party). We got nothing much of natural resources to tap on except human resource and that automatically classified us as an Export Oriented nation. It is exactly this fact that from a macro economical scale perspective we are very influenced by external elements where we may not have control over except to embrace, compromise and collaborate with these external elements to cushion any possible adverse effect that will disrupt the fragile infrastructure that was engineered (in whatever manner) by MM and his old guards “well, most part of it before the turn of the century”, that affected ultimately the overall wellness of the nation in terms of GDP growth. Internal consumptions are again mainly of imported goods, in the event of any possible fall out (example of such, massive withdrawal of foreign Investments and a massive drop of new FDI to spur growth, not barring “possible neighboring insurgents?” intrusion purely to exterminate (may be this scenario is too dramatized), we will be at the mercy of our fostered alliances to continue to provide the supplies, barring on whether we still have any strategic value to these alliances.
For the betterment and lasting future of this tiny nation we all concerned citizenry young or old, rich or poor, want, wishes to or call home, we need someone, a party or a collegian of unified parties (whether for check and balance or to collaborate ~ this will be a miracle I sincerely hope to see in my life time) and yes, we certainly need “carbon nanotube” to reinforce the strength and at the same time improve the flexibility to this weaved web.
The question of how Singapore will fare after the demise of LKY may well be redundant. My grave fear for Singapore and my fellow Singaporeans is that the Singapore economic bubble has just burst. That the miracle has ended – while the miracle maker is still alive.
I fear that we have squandered the last two to three decades in that we have not positioned ourselves to continue to excel as a first world country. Our young have had initiative, creativity, risk-taking and entrepreneurship bred and beaten out of them.
We might well talk about THINKING SCHOOLS but we put in OB markers which are invisible. You only know you have transgressed when you get beaten over the head. Government dictates what the young will or will not think, and then says to them “be creative”. Get real!
The preponderance of maids adds to the dependency syndrome of Singaporeans. All in all, not a pretty picture, created by Government.
LKY should just retire, instead of macro-managing. If not for him, Ho Ching would not have suddenly quitted Temasek position. After losing billions, I think father-in-law stepped in and said she made decisions too early!
Seriously, all LKY and Gang really said are more false binaries to promote his party. Think about it – the image of a dying old man versus all-out crazy anarchist will benefit PAP or Opposition more? That’s why all these nonsense are propaganda until PAP has demonstrated fundamental change.
70) GABRIEL on April 22nd, 2009 2.50 pm
While i like to say he has achieved remarkablitiies before,
I would also like to take this opportunity to gently remind that
the People have contributed to all the achievements as without the people there can be no achievements. I mean, how to achieve MRT system excellence without our imported technologies, engineers and consultants? and lets not forget the citizens who supported.
but all in all, he is such a great great super great great man.
once old man is gone, we will work even harder
#9 randomnessinmind: Even TOC has donations and such helping the poor
ComChest sets its highest fund-raising goal of S$52.6m.
Channel NewsAsia, 22 April 2009: “The money raised will be used primarily for enabling families, and sustaining families and services – by funding 68 charities which serve 340,000 people”
———-
#75 radlife66: What about Israel? Israel has a population of about 7 million and they have a very robust paliamentary system and somemore in the mist of constant war and fighting with its neighbour.
Their government is highly unstable. Before the recent election, the previous one was formed just 2 years ago.
———-
#80 aloha: LKY should just retire, instead of macro-managing. If not for him, Ho Ching would not have suddenly quitted Temasek position
Is it speculation or was it reported somewhere? Do you think Ho Ching should have been kept?
Lee Kuan Yew is indeed a great man, so great that there is no available replacement when he passed on.
And he is truly a visionary who could foresee the need for himself to rise from his grave and he told us so. Me agrees with him wholeheartedly with regard ‘the need’, however, whether we get to see him rise or go down under forever, it’s anybody’s guess.
Btw, there are ‘feelings’ that there are ‘splits’ within the PAP itself which will come into the surface after the passing of LKY. Me is more inclined to believe that LKYs’ diehard supporters will be scattered, not knowing who else to support as there are no equivalent calibre(to LKY/and to them, the Fans) after his demise.
Whatever the case, history will record his leadership, his deeds when he leads SIN and what transpires and happens on his demise, the leadership(s) that follows and his(LKYs’) influences on those that take over his controls.
As for us Singaporeans, livings have to go on regardless of whether our live get better or worse depending on the abilities, consciences and integrities of the leaders.
All human, no matter how great or otherwise, has to die and of course if one is able to leave behind a good name and a great reputation, he/she befits the Chinese Saying ‘liu fang bai si’ meaning ‘ fondly remembered for centuries’ rounding up ones’ existence and contribution.
patriot
78) Observer (SG-HK) on April 22nd, 2009 7.24 pm ,
well written.
I like the tongue-in-cheek piece by Ohnani, especially the bit about the Doyenne of objective reporting. Good!
#84) X-|
‘Their government is highly unstable. Before the recent election, the previous one was formed just 2 years ago.’
………………………………………………………………………….
Their government is highly unstable. Yet it is still functioning. It has not collapsed. It is not a failed state.
Before 1981, PAP leaders warned that if even one opposition member were to get into parliament foreign investors would not put their money in Singapore and the country would suffer. JBJ won in Anson but Singapore still prosper.
PAP and LKY had been and are still using scare tactics to dissuade people from voting for the opposition. If PAP can be guaranteed and insured to be forever good and efficient then we can keep the one-party system here.
Unfortunately, not even LKY can guarentee his PAP.
Hi Edward #88,
They have a different economic-political situation, so we cannot predict what will happen to us if you adopt their political system. It is not difficult just to remain uncollapsed. Not many countries in the world has “collapsed” anyway.
While LKY cannot guarantee that PAP remain forever like this, no other political system can guarantee either. Most anti-PAP movements do not show how it is possible to create a good and efficient system either.
Passion alone is not enough to deliver. Look at the Renci corruption case. Ultimately, we all need the know-how to manage efficiently.
Old man think Sg belongs to him only. Everything he does is for himself and his gang not for the citizen. If he goes down to the grave, will Sg gone too? I believe PAP will bury with him NOT SG!
a leader, however good he is/was is never loved by his people if he doesn’t know when to stop.
Do you know that there is something call “Cloning”?
We might just see a CLONE… hahahaha never ending.
A good leader would have found an equally good or better replacement, not putting a son in place and expect all S’poreans to be idiots.
Isn’t it true only idiots believe the son is the best person to lead ? lol
Isn’t it true the old man had 50 years to find the best person to lead ?
Isn’t it true the old man had 50 years to improve on his system of selection ?
Isn’t it true after 50 years of so called worldclass education system, the old man cannot find someone better ?
Isn’t it true the old man will not have the guts to face the truth ?
Isn’t it true if a poll was conducted on his son, the results will vindicate me ?
the Aware saga unfolding currently shows that very good brains alone does not equate to being a good leader.
#89) drawdE
‘Passion alone is not enough to deliver. Look at the Renci corruption case. Ultimately, we all need the know-how to manage efficiently.’
………………………………………………………..
Mark Twain once said,” To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government.”
PAP may end up like Renci where the monk had all the power including raising his own pay by 300%. It will not materalise in the near future but if and when it does happen the present leaders will be too old to do anything.
See this comparison of between Taiwan and Singapore from a Chinese American (and so I think his point-of-view is more neutral). He considers Singapore to have less corruption and smaller income inequality.
As an educated Chinese American, I have to agree with Jackie Chan. I have lived in the US for most of my life and have lived in Taiwan for over a decade. Many of my friends here in Taiwan and my wiffe, who is Taiwanese, agree that Chinese people need more control than what is used to in the West. Too many Chinese, if given the liberty, are selfish and very self serving with very little consideration for others. With the right kind of governmental controls, Chinese people can accomplish tremendous things.
A good example is Singapore. This is a city/state with a predominantly Chinese population and a government that rules nearly all aspects of the people’s lives. This is a very clean (literally) country with a very strong track record of prosperity and very little corruption. Contrast this with democratic Taiwan and its tremendously corrupt politicians and wide disparities between the rich and the poor. Taiwan is also has a lot of problems with pollution and environmental protection Which country is better off?
— Et
I have more faith in an uncorrupted young mind than an 85 yr old almighty leader.
Dear SinKaporean, please do not bang on the next party to remove all the unjust laws. If anything there is a danger the new gahment will continue to use the existing laws like PAP did with ISA to stay in power. SinKaporean must be prepared to take to the streets to demonstrate to remove the unjust laws. If we don’t we may replace dictator mark 1 with dictator mark2. Recent history of the Phillipine is also a good example when Marcos’s family was finally overthrown. SinKapore will be the last one to follow. We have an old man of 85 who believed he coulds rise from the dead like Jesus to fix our future problem. What more can we say? Remember Mao? He had to go to meet his maker as well like all of us.The new leader of China had its own problems but they did reasonabily well without him. SinKaporean will and can do well with famiLee as well. Hopefully like China it will be a better place.
At the rate that Singapore leaders refuse to admit mistakes made / side line public interest issues, they will be doomed in time to come.
Quote -
” He is, however, confident that Singapore will see a new generation of leaders coming forth in the self-renewal process. But Mr Ho raised doubts over whether the PAP will continue to advance its current one-party dominance by producing its future leaders in which Singaporeans may or may not support in the future. His other concern is whether tomorrow’s generation can weather a change in the political climate which may see more opposition entering the scene. “
Sadly I was one of those student that was moded because in my school day, if one do well in secondary one, one was automatically assigned into pure science e.g. subjects like history, geogragphy,biology were dropped. But in life, we are more inventive when our future was at stake. I wanted to read medicine or law but without the appropriate subjects I had to satisfy myself with engineering which I duly took. If there is a will there is always way. I ended up as the chief engineer in a multinational company and living abroad as I was assigned oversea to part take in reseach and ended up taking charge of it years later. My children had taken over my dreams as one is a lawyer another is a doctor.